Sustainability as a “magic concept”

Sustainability studies have not been able to come up with a consensus conceptualization of “sustainability,” despite many attempts. This article asks what this conceptual confusion means. I do this through a (conceptual history) vertical analysis, and horizontal (discourse) analysis of the current...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Trond Ove Tøllefsen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Universidad de Deusto 2021-05-01
Series:Cuadernos Europeos de Deusto
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ced.revistas.deusto.es/article/view/2093
id doaj-3676b09ed3e34d2299aa39474da2c04d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3676b09ed3e34d2299aa39474da2c04d2021-09-23T18:46:36ZengUniversidad de DeustoCuadernos Europeos de Deusto 1130-83542445-35872021-05-016410.18543/ced-64-2021pp29-52Sustainability as a “magic concept”Trond Ove Tøllefsen0Uppsala University Sustainability studies have not been able to come up with a consensus conceptualization of “sustainability,” despite many attempts. This article asks what this conceptual confusion means. I do this through a (conceptual history) vertical analysis, and horizontal (discourse) analysis of the current use of the term. It finds that sustainability is a perfect fit for what Hupe and Pollit have called a “magic concept,” in that it is; broad, has a positive normative charge, imply consensus or at least the possibility of overcoming current conflicts, and has global marketability (2011: 643). This has both positive and negative effects: On the one hand, the popularity of the concept of sustainability has enabled an overarching discourse on the responsible use of natural resources. On the other hand, the concept is vulnerable to various strategic misuses, ranging from corporate greenwashing to Luddite passions. Based on a vertical analysis of the history of sustainability, this vagueness is not a coincidence: It was part of a political bargain at its birth, where environmental concerns were grafted onto an older discourse on “development” during the writing of the 1987 Brundtland report. Based on a horizontal analysis, this vagueness is now inherent to the concept and cannot be abandoned without losing the very magic qualities that make sustainability such a rallying point. This finding points to the conclusion that we should be cautious about how sustainability is wielded. Received: 03 February 2021 Accepted: 01 March 2021 https://ced.revistas.deusto.es/article/view/2093sustainabilitysustainable developmentdevelopmentmagic conceptsconceptual history
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Trond Ove Tøllefsen
spellingShingle Trond Ove Tøllefsen
Sustainability as a “magic concept”
Cuadernos Europeos de Deusto
sustainability
sustainable development
development
magic concepts
conceptual history
author_facet Trond Ove Tøllefsen
author_sort Trond Ove Tøllefsen
title Sustainability as a “magic concept”
title_short Sustainability as a “magic concept”
title_full Sustainability as a “magic concept”
title_fullStr Sustainability as a “magic concept”
title_full_unstemmed Sustainability as a “magic concept”
title_sort sustainability as a “magic concept”
publisher Universidad de Deusto
series Cuadernos Europeos de Deusto
issn 1130-8354
2445-3587
publishDate 2021-05-01
description Sustainability studies have not been able to come up with a consensus conceptualization of “sustainability,” despite many attempts. This article asks what this conceptual confusion means. I do this through a (conceptual history) vertical analysis, and horizontal (discourse) analysis of the current use of the term. It finds that sustainability is a perfect fit for what Hupe and Pollit have called a “magic concept,” in that it is; broad, has a positive normative charge, imply consensus or at least the possibility of overcoming current conflicts, and has global marketability (2011: 643). This has both positive and negative effects: On the one hand, the popularity of the concept of sustainability has enabled an overarching discourse on the responsible use of natural resources. On the other hand, the concept is vulnerable to various strategic misuses, ranging from corporate greenwashing to Luddite passions. Based on a vertical analysis of the history of sustainability, this vagueness is not a coincidence: It was part of a political bargain at its birth, where environmental concerns were grafted onto an older discourse on “development” during the writing of the 1987 Brundtland report. Based on a horizontal analysis, this vagueness is now inherent to the concept and cannot be abandoned without losing the very magic qualities that make sustainability such a rallying point. This finding points to the conclusion that we should be cautious about how sustainability is wielded. Received: 03 February 2021 Accepted: 01 March 2021
topic sustainability
sustainable development
development
magic concepts
conceptual history
url https://ced.revistas.deusto.es/article/view/2093
work_keys_str_mv AT trondovetøllefsen sustainabilityasamagicconcept
_version_ 1717370341284642816