The evolution of sustainability models, from descriptive, to strategic, to the three pillars framework for applied solutions

Abstract

The three pillars of sustainability framework is an applied and solutions oriented approach to sustainable development, which at the broadest and most important scale supports the creation of new economic and political institutions that embed (from start to finish) the key inputs, stakeholders, and incentive structures necessary for sustainability planning and projects to be feasible and successful. The three pillars framework is based upon the key and connected roles of: (1) technology and innovation; (2) laws and governance; and (3) economics and financial incentives. Through the lens of a review of the evolution of sustainability models over the last several decades, it is proposed that the three pillars framework can more effectively help us translate complex sustainability issues into ideas and an applied focus that can be better understood and acted upon by community and economic stakeholders. This, combined with full transparency, creates the necessary, and often sufficient, foundation for successful, scalable, more rapidly deployable, and culturally acceptable sustainability solutions. As demonstrated in practice and in numerous case studies, sustainability solutions that engage all three pillars at once—good governance, technology implementation, and creating market incentives—are most effective and durable.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    see C40 (https://www.c40.org/) and 100 Resilient Cities (https://www.100resilientcities.org/).

References

  1. Burkhardt-Holm P, Zehnder AJB (2018) Fishnetz: assessing outcomes and impacts of a project at the interface of science and policy. Environ Sci Pol 82:52–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Clune WH (2011) A comparative law analysis of the use of state-level green procurement in the European Union and the United States. Nordisk Miljörättslig Tidskrift/Nordic Environ Law J 2:3–34

    Google Scholar 

  3. Clune WH, Zehnder AJB (2018) The three pillars of sustainability framework: approaches for laws and governance. J Environ Prot 9:211–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. da Cruz NF, Marques RC (2014) Scorecards for sustainable local governments. Cities 39:165–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Elkington J (1998) Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business. New Society Publishers Gabriola Island BC, Stony Creek CT

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hirsch Hadorn G, Bradley D, Pohl C, Rist S, Wiesmann U (2006) Implications of transdisciplinarity for sustainability research. Ecol Econ 60:119–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. McG Tegart WJ, Sheldon GW, DC Griffiths (eds) (1990) The IPCC impacts assessment: climate change. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ipcc_far_wg_II_full_report.pdf

  8. Meadows DH, Meadows DL, Randers J, Behrens WW (1972) The limits to growth—a report for the club of Rome’s project on the predicament of mankind. Universe Books, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Porter ME (1991) America’s green strategy. Sci Am 264(4):168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Porter ME, Kramer MR (2011) Creating shared value. Harv Bus Rev 2011:62–77

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rockström J et al (2009) Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating pace for humanity. Ecol Soc 14(2):32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sandor R, Kanakasabai M, Marques R, Clark N (2015) Sustainable investing and environmental markets—opportunities in a new asset class. World Scientific, Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  13. Schmidheiny S (1992) Changing course. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  14. Schmidheiny S, Zorraquin FJL (1996) Financing change. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  15. Schmidt-Bleek F (1997) MIPS and factor 10 for a sustainable and profitable economy. Wuppertal Institute, Wuppertal

    Google Scholar 

  16. SCOPE-Rep. No. 13 (1979) The Global Carbon Cycle. In: Bolin B, Degens ET, Kempe S, Ketner P (eds) John Wiley Chichester

  17. Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment (1972), in Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, UN Doc.A/CONF.48/14, at 2 and Corr.1

  18. Turner G (2014) Is Global Collapse Imminent? MSSI Research Paper No. 4, Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute, The University of Melbourne.

  19. UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development (2019) The impact of rapid technological change on sustainable development. Report of the Secretary-General

  20. UNCTAD (2015) Investment policy framework for sustainable development. United Nations

  21. Von Weizsäcker EU, Lovins AB, Lovins LH (1997) Factor four—doubling wealth. Halving Resource Use Earthscan, London

    Google Scholar 

  22. WCED (1987) World commission on environment and development. Oxford University Press, Oxford New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William H. Clune.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Handled by Vinod Tewari, The Energy and resources Institute (TERI), India.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 42 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Clune, W.H., Zehnder, A.J.B. The evolution of sustainability models, from descriptive, to strategic, to the three pillars framework for applied solutions. Sustain Sci 15, 1001–1006 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00776-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Economic development
  • Sustainability framework
  • Planning tools
  • Policy tools