Unit 3 Sustainability.pdf

Unit 3 Sustainability Summary intro system thinking Ehrenfeld Article Ehrenfeld discusses why achieving sustainability is so difficult, despite many efforts. He argues that one of the main reasons is that we often try to solve problems superficially by addressing only the symptoms instead of the u...

Unit 3 Sustainability Summary intro system thinking Ehrenfeld Article Ehrenfeld discusses why achieving sustainability is so difficult, despite many efforts. He argues that one of the main reasons is that we often try to solve problems superficially by addressing only the symptoms instead of the underlying causes. This approach stems from what he calls "reductionist thinking," where we break down complex problems into smaller, manageable parts and try to solve them individually. However, this approach misses the bigger picture, which results in unsustainable solutions and the creation of new problems. Ehrenfeld uses examples from industrial ecology and business cases to illustrate how companies, by focusing on small improvements like recycling, often overlook the broader environmental impact of their products. He advocates for a holistic approach to sustainability, where not only the symptoms are addressed, but also the root causes of the problems are tackled. Examples of Loops and Their Meaning: Ehrenfeld uses causal loops to illustrate how our current problem-solving behavior often fails and even leads to worsening effects. These loops show how our actions go in circles and how unintended consequences often arise from well-intentioned actions. 1. The Basic Problem-Solving Loop (Balancing Loop): o In this loop, as shown in Figure 1, when we encounter a problem (such as hunger), we try to solve it with direct action (eating). As we eat more, the hunger decreases. This balancing loop represents the daily problem-solving behavior that works in the short term, but it does not address the root cause (such as poor diet or eating habits). This is how many companies respond to environmental problems, for example, by improving recycling without questioning whether the production and consumption of those products are sustainable in the first place. 2. The Fixes-that-Fail Archetype (Reinforcing Loop): o Figure 2 introduces the "fixes-that-fail" loop, where the symptom of a problem is addressed, but in the long term, new problems arise or the original issue worsens. For example, improving car fuel efficiency helps reduce emissions, but these benefits are canceled out by increased driving and the popularity of larger vehicles like SUVs. This is a recurring pattern in many sustainability initiatives, which only bring temporary improvements while the underlying issue remains unresolved. 3. Shifting-the-Burden Archetype: o In Figure 3, Ehrenfeld describes how we often focus on symptoms and lose sight of the fundamental problem. He calls this the "shifting-the- burden" pattern. A good example is the focus on CO2 emission rates and carbon trading to combat climate change. While these measures may seem useful in the short term, they shift attention away from the real solution: developing fully renewable energy sources. This is similar  to companies focusing on eco-efficiency (using less energy or materials) without questioning whether their production and consumption patterns are sustainable in the long run. 4. Technological Fix (Technohubris): o In Figure 5, Ehrenfeld explains that society often relies on technological solutions to solve problems (which he calls “technohubris”). This means we place too much trust in technology to save us from crises like climate change, without realizing that technological solutions often address only symptoms. For example, building more efficient cars or houses helps reduce consumption, but at the same time, we continue to consume and produce in unsustainable ways. The more fundamental change, such as developing new forms of energy or reducing consumption, is often overlooked. He warns that technohubris can blind us to the real solutions, which require cultural and systemic change. Answers to the Questions: 1. What does Ehrenfeld identify as the reason(s) why sustainability is so difficult to achieve? o Ehrenfeld points out that sustainability is difficult to achieve because we are often stuck in a reductionist approach. We address the symptoms of problems rather than their causes, which results in temporary solutions that are not effective in the long term. Additionally, our reliance on technological solutions (technohubris) leads us to overlook the broader, underlying problem. 2. What definitional approach for sustainability does Ehrenfeld seem to pursue? o Ehrenfeld advocates for a holistic approach to sustainability. Instead of simply reducing negative impacts (less CO2 emissions, less energy consumption), we need to focus on fundamental systemic changes that lead to true sustainability. He emphasizes that reducing unsustainability is not the same as creating sustainability. 3. What does Ehrenfeld mean by "technohubris"? o "Technohubris" refers to the overconfidence in technology as the ultimate solution to complex problems like climate change. Ehrenfeld warns that technological solutions often address only the symptoms and do not tackle the root causes of unsustainability. This reliance on technology can distract us from the need for deeper cultural and structural changes to achieve real sustainability. o Sustainability: The nature of the problem “fixes-that-fail”: the orginal problem comes back at a later time. These are symptomatic rather than long term solutions to a problem. So, the problem reoccurs over time as only the symptom is address but not the root cause of the problem. So rather than becoming actually sustainable we just become less unstainable for the time being. “fixes-that-fail” à are not only ineffective but frequently creates also ‘side-effects”. These unintended consequences can create new problems inn the course of trying to solve initial problems. Besides side effects it can also misleading releave the urgency of finding fundamental solutions. Treating symptoms instead of finding a cure. “shifting-the-burden” à Attempting to address the symptoms of ecological stress rather than go to the root of the problem. Routine solution. Think outside the box. Rebound effect à sometimes fixes-that-fail do not only create other problems besides the orginal problem. But they make also the orginal problem worse. Benefits of systems thinking for sustainability: Potential to see undesirable consequences of actions Can help prevent ‘fixes-that-fail’ Remember that these systems occur inside organizations as well as in broader society Ø Look for perverse incentives and shifting burdens within organizations è Real improvements come not from shifted but removed burden. Removing it all together. Ehrenfeld critique: Some progress is better than none. Sustainability as a wicked problem. Sustainability overall can be regarded as wicked problems. Characteristics of wicked problems are: 1. Extremely difficult (impossible) to define precisely 2. No definitive solution 3. Implemented solutions tend to have (large) consequences 4. Interconnected with other problems 5. Involving many stakeholders