10.

1177/0885412204264529
Human Nature and Sustainable Development
Journal of Planning Literature

Human Nature and

Sustainable Development:
A Strategic Challenge for Planners

Edward J. Jepson Jr. (1989, 1995), Harper and Stein (1995), Spain (1995),
Berke and Kartez (1995), and others, in which the theo-
retical connection between North American planning
Sustainable development has been accepted as a conceptual and sustainability was being explored and developed.
framework for local planning. However, there continues to be Further theoretical enhancement and connection to
difficulty incorporating the full range of its components (i.e., practice in follow-up writings (Jepson 2001; Berke and
balanced consideration of environment, economy, and Manta Conroy 2000; Hart, Mazzotta, and Kellman 1999;
equity) into local planning in the form of policies and pro- Beatley and Manning 1997; Thomas and Furuseth 1997;
grams. A part of the reason for this difficulty is the continuing others) has resulted in sustainable development being
competition between two worldviews, the expansionist and generally accepted within the profession as a valid
ecological. The author proposes the incremental integration framework with respect to both planning policies and
of the two worldviews through an overall strategy of action planning process.
and the use of a decision model that incorporates project and Still, despite the logic of sustainable development
context information to identify appropriate method and role. and its recognized relationship to planning, there con-
As the ecological worldview becomes more institutionalized, tinues to be difficulty incorporating the full range of its
it is likely that its components will be increasingly reflected in dimensions into local planning policies and programs.
community development strategies. For example, Berke and Manta Conroy (2000) found no
significant differences in terms of policies and strate-
gies between planning documents with sustainable
development as an organizing concept and those with-
Keywords: sustainable development; worldview; planner out. Jepson (2003) reported that, while communities are
role; decision model engaging in the enactment of many policies and tech-

A landmark with respect to the interface between EDWARD J. JEPSON JR. is an assistant professor in the Depart-
ment of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Tennessee,
planning and sustainable development was Scott Knoxville and a member of the American Institute of Certified Plan-
Campbell’s 1996 paper. This paper held integration of ners. He received his Ph.D. in urban and regional planning from the
the two to be necessary and essential and proposed a University of Wisconsin, Madison. His research focus is on plan-
conceptual schematic that required planners to find and ning for sustainable development, growth management, economic
development, and land use analysis.
translate into land use strategies the intersecting point
of economy, environment, and social equity. Camp- Journal of Planning Literature, Vol. 19, No. 1 (August 2004).
bell’s work built on the solid foundation that had been DOI: 10.1177/0885412204264529
laid by the writings of Beatley (1995), Berke (1995), Rees Copyright © 2004 by Sage Publications

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

4 Journal of Planning Literature

niques that are consistent with sustainable develop- have no control” (White 1994, 24) and to let our prefer-
ment, few show evidence of successfully integrating all ences be the guide to our decisions rather than the facts
three of the “E’s” of sustainable development (i.e., econ- (Jones 1996), both of which have been identified as
omy, environment, and equity). The purpose of this human tendencies. Finally, its alleviation of a sense of
paper is to try to explain this lack of full integration of personal responsibility (each of us behaving within the
planning and sustainable development through an context of automatic systemic adjustments) is consis-
examination of worldviews and human nature, and to tent with a human nature that desires to be compen-
use this information to inform the strategy of planners sated for something that we have lost but not to pay for
who may want to advance a sustainable development its recovery (Kartez 1989).
agenda.
Still, the inherent strength of the expansionist per-
spective has not prevented the emergence of an alterna-
PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT— tive ecological perspective. This perspective holds that
INHERENTLY PROBLEMATIC there are limits to the ability of the natural environment
to support human beings and that the level and charac-
Despite strong evidence of the need to more fully bal-
ter of human activity must be tempered by an apprecia-
ance the needs of society and economy with those of the
tion of the effects of that activity on natural resources
environment as is called for under sustainable develop-
and characteristics (Rees 1995; Wackernagel and Rees
ment, opinion remains divided regarding what
1996; Costanza 1989). It draws from several sources of
sustainability is and how it should be used as a concep-
thought, or viewpoints, one of which involves a repudi-
tual guide for the formulation of public policy. The rea-
ation of the Judeo-Christian tradition of man’s domin-
sons this continues to be the case are complex and mul-
ion over nature based on a reinterpretation of various
tifaceted. Of principle significance is the existence of
biblical passages (Beatley 1989). It is also rooted in the
two cultural foundations, each of which tends to cause a
love of nature for its own sake that can have an almost
repudiation of a more sustainable approach to the
spiritual quality, traceable to eighteenth- and nine-
human development challenge. The first foundation is
teenth-century sentiments of nostalgia and apprecia-
our Judeo-Christian religious philosophy, which
tion (Dwyer, Schroeder, and Gobster 1994; Platt 1994;
sharply separates man from nature and holds the for-
Jacobs 1991, 9; Lynch 1981, 255). Still a third foundation
mer as having dominion and rights of exploitation over
is a utopian tradition that seeks to integrate human
the latter. Under this perspective, human beings are
beings into their environment in a way that is more con-
viewed as being entitled to use nature in a way that is
ducive to the full range of their needs and their nature
most beneficial to our welfare, with little or no regard
(Spain 1995). Finally, the ecological perspective is the
for other considerations. The other foundation is the
product of simple logical reflection, namely, a recogni-
empiricist tradition, in which nature is viewed as mech-
tion that unconstrained consumption of limited
anistic and something that can and should be manipu-
resources will lead inevitably to Garret Hardin’s “trag-
lated by human beings for our benefit. Emerging from
edy of the commons” and social chaos (Ruckelshaus
that tradition is a scientific method that is reductionist
1989).1
and tends to encourage fragmentation rather than the
integration which is so essential to the sustainable Within the context of these two competing
development framework (Carley and Christie 1993, 69- worldviews, economics has had a preeminent role in
71; Beatley 1989). the interpretation of sustainable development as a pos-
From these two cultural foundations has emerged a sible model for the human system. Perhaps this is only
worldview that has been labeled “expansionist” (Rees natural, for both ecology (from which the theory of
1995). As the dominant social paradigm, it views sustainability is derived) and economics share the same
human system growth as virtually unlimited and conceptual concern with the flow of energy and
mechanistic due to the unique capacity of human resources among and between users within a system
beings to utilize, adapt, and innovate and the control- (Rees 1992). Within the field of economics, there is a fun-
ling effects of prices. Its strength is reinforced by several damental split into two camps that essentially corre-
observed human tendencies. Under its infinite growth sponds to the two worldviews previously discussed.
precepts, our inherent disinclination to extend our Corresponding to the expansionist framework is the
sphere of concern either temporarily or spatially is conventional viewpoint, or neoclassical, which
much more easily accommodated (Garbarino 1992, 15; revolves around the concepts of discounting and mar-
Nijkamp, Lasschuit, and Soeteman 1992; Dubos 1981, ket. Corresponding more to the ecological framework,
84). Its mechanistic character also makes it more possi- or at least admitting more of its principles of accommo-
ble for us to “tune out long-term trends over which (we) dation and moderation, is the so-called steady-state

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

 Human Nature and Sustainable Development 5

model and the resource economics branch of involves a resource-based, rather than a price-based,
economics. definition of scarcity. Under this model, scarcity is
As a manifestation of the dominant expansionist per- defined as a function, not of the marketplace but of the
spective, neoclassical economics tends to dominate our availability of a resource in relation to the amount of
public policies at all levels of government, from the effort required to obtain it (Daly 1968). Thus, the core
local through to the national, and even international, characteristic of a steady-state economy is that its scale
levels. Essentially, the neoclassical school holds that the is limited by the availability of natural resources (van
economic system is circular and self-regulating and den Bergh and van der Straaten 1994), meaning that its
consists of supply and demand functions that are the growth should be tied to the rates at which renewable
result of universal laws and susceptible to mathemati- resources can be regenerated, nonrenewable resources
cal formulation. Included among neoclassical precepts can be replaced by renewable resources, and wastes can
are that the economic system exists in isolation from be assimilated (Daly 1989).
both nature and the rest of society, and that it can be The significance of Daly’s model lies in the fact that it
studied apart from those; that production can expand denies the basic expansionist premise that the economy
indefinitely, limited only by the range of human inge- exists outside the limits of the natural environment.
nuity; that market price is the most efficient mechanism Rather, it holds that manmade and natural capital are
for the allocation of resources and commodities among complementary rather than substitutable, that is, both
competing users; that the appropriate focus of inquiry are needed (Rees 1995; Daly and Cobb, 1989, 75). This
is the individual; and that the “maximization objective” requires consumption and growth to be artificially
causes individuals to be interested in optimizing their restrained at some “minimum acceptable level” that is
level of satisfaction, resulting in a tendency to “dis- determined by the availability of natural resources
count” future benefits (Gottlieb 1995; Rees and rather than the forces of supply and demand (Tisdell
Roseland 1991; Ayres and Kneese 1989; Costanza 1989; 1988). Furthermore, since the physical expansion of the
Daly and Cobb 1989, 46; Norgaard 1989; Barbier 1987). economy is viewed as having limits, growth can no lon-
This reliance on price as a measure of value also leads to ger be assumed to be the solution to poverty. Public pol-
an assumption that manmade and natural capital are icy derived from the steady-state model would, there-
interchangeable (known as the “substitution fore, focus on improving the economy in a qualitative
principle”) (van den Bergh and van der Straaten 1994; sense, so that it becomes more efficient in terms of pro-
James, Nijkamp, and Opschoor 1989). duction and more equitable in terms of distribution
Significant divergence from the dominant neoclassi- (Carley and Christie 1993, 41; Rees 1990, 16; Daly 1989).
cal viewpoint began to emerge after the relationship Resource economics offers a means by which such
between ecosystem theory and economics was bril- concepts can be integrated into public decision making.
liantly portrayed by Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen. In his Drawn from the institutionalist school of economics,
1971 treatise, Georgescu-Roegen posits that—in accor- which holds scientific reductionism to be useless and
dance with the second law of thermodynamics—the counterproductive, it calls for a theoretical structure
resource consumption inherent in economic activity (as that looks at the entire pattern of institutional interac-
it is in any productive activity) results in an increase in tions that produce public policy. Such pattern is defined
entropy in the natural environment on which it not just by market exchanges (which are important) but
depends (as is the case with any so-called living system) also by individual habits, customs and morals, the
for resources and the disposal of wastes (Ekins 1993; application of technology, and organizational manage-
Proops 1989). About this same time, Garrett Hardin ment. The theoretical focus is on the whole of society,
(1968) also authored a paper on the “tragedy of the com- with the intent being the uncovering of the full range of
mons,” the basic tenet of which is that resource exhaus- “working rules,” or institutional interactions, which
tion/degradation (i.e., of the “commons”) tends to be a guide it toward a particular future (Chasse 1986, 773;
natural consequence of rational economic decision Commons 1931, 650). Since the purpose of such work-
making and is only preventable through public/com- ing rules is to maintain the “going concern” (i.e., the
munal regulation (Meadows, Meadows, and Randers nation/state/organization) (Rutherford 1983, 723), it
1992, 188). becomes proper and appropriate for society to replace
Both of these together laid the groundwork for the the present, faulty pattern of decision making with a
introduction in the early 1970s of the “steady-state new, improved pattern that incorporates social and
model” by Herman Daly. Essentially identical to the environmental, as well as economic, values. (See Biddle
“stationary state” model that was originally presented 1 9 9 0 ; Du g g er 1 9 8 4 . ) Cons i s tent wi th thes e
nearly 100 years ago by the classical economist John institutionalist school principles, resource economics is
Stuart Mill (de Steiguer 1995), the steady-state model directly concerned with the development of methods

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

6 Journal of Planning Literature

for the accurate valuation and effective allocation of the gap between the two worldviews. For example,
public amenity resources (Harris and McGown 1990). Meadows, Meadows, and Randers (1992, 209) define a
sustainable society as “one that has in place informa-
Is a True Definition Possible?
tional, social and institutional mechanisms that keep
With two very different worldviews guiding our check on . . . feedback loops.” An implicit assumption in
thoughts and (by extension) our behavior and our col- such a viewpoint is that our current (expansionist) soci-
lective public policies, it is not difficult to understand ety can be made compatible with sustainability. The
why a universally accepted definition of sustainable definition proposed by Kinsley (1994) suggests the
development has not been forthcoming. Each of us car- direct incorporation into human development policy of
ries in our hearts and minds some parts of both the such ecosystem concepts as “ecological threshold” and
expansionist and the ecological perspective. Who is “carrying capacity,” the latter of which is used by
immune to wanting a larger house or a larger car, yet Girardet (1992, 177) in conjunction with the sociological
who does not also think (at least to some extent) of the term “quality of life.” By combining terms from both
waste that accompanies ostentatious consumption? An viewpoints, there is the implicit assumption that the
example of how this can be played out in local public two can be merged.
policy is a discussion that recently occurred among the However, the definition that is most frequently cited
city council members of an American city regarding a and widely accepted is one proposed by the Brundtland
“living wage.” Proponents (of which there were many) Commission in its landmark report Our Common Future:
were pushing the city to adopt a higher wage to protect Sustainable development is “development that meets
its lowest paid workers from a condition of poverty. The the needs of the present without compromising the abil-
councilor’s voice that held sway in the debate asked, ity of future generations to meet their own needs”
“How can the city intervene in what is a natural func- (World Commission on Environment and Develop-
tion of supply and demand?” She wondered why the ment 1987, 43). This definition raises as many questions
wage should be raised if there are enough people apply- as it answers. How are “needs” defined? How far into
ing for the jobs at the current lower wage. She even pro- the “future” must we extend our concern? How can we
posed that the city had no right to intervene in such a know what will result in future generations being
way! Issues of fairness and rightness did not hold sway; “compromised”? One person’s range of “needs” may
what mattered was the market. Thus, the neoclassical include a sport utility vehicle, another’s may not, and
worldview was used to justify and maintain a current neither preference is inherently inconsistent with this
public policy that probably left families in poverty. definition. One person may argue that two generations
The key in the above example is not that there were is “out” far enough, another may want to extend it 1,000
two sides squared off, each representing one of the years; present behavior will be drastically different
prevalent worldviews. Rather, what is most significant under one perspective than under the other. Notice also
is that the argument derived from the expansionist (i.e., its intrinsic anthropocentric character: nothing is
neoclassical, price-based) perspective prevailed. Cer- included about the “needs” of the environment or of
tainly, the councilor with the swaying argument is not other biological entities. Presumably, a future world in
immune to considerations of fairness and rightness; which monoculture forests have replaced biologically
however, the strength of her dominant worldview was diverse ones is acceptable, so long as human beings can
overpowering. survive. Clearly, since this definition accommodates
This competition between the two worldviews can both the expansionist and ecological perspectives, the
be seen in the definitional efforts associated with sus- battle between the two worldviews is left unresolved,
tainable development. Evidence of the dominant or at least unaddressed.
expansionist perspective can be found in definitions This vaguely descriptive statement, then, becomes
that emphasize the achievement of human objectives the only acceptable “true” definition of sustainable
such as those relating to consumption levels, economic development. It is left as a concept that is open to inter-
benefits, individual happiness, and community “con- pretation. Perhaps this is so because, as Scruggs (1993,
sciousness” (Despotakis, Giaoutzi, and Nijkamp 1992; 3) maintains, it is in the nature of all major concepts that
Daly 1989; Smit and Brklacich 1989; Barbier 1987). On encompass human ideals—such as liberty or democ-
the other hand, evidence of the ecological perspective is racy—to be “subject to diverse interpretation.” A more
revealed in definitions that contain a preponderance of likely explanation, though, is that it is the only defini-
references to maintaining environmental stocks and tion that is possible, given the current competition—at
assets and ongoing systemic functioning (Rydin 1992). both the social and the individual levels—between the
There are also some definitions that attempt to bridge expansionist and the ecological worldviews. Such

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

 Human Nature and Sustainable Development 7

vagueness serves to protect the dominance of the for- rate of resource consumption without necessarily sub-
mer while accommodating (without necessarily verting the maximization objective that is so strongly
furthering) the yearnings of the latter. imbedded in the neoclassical school (Daly and Cobb
1989; Stone 1973).
Is Integration of the Two Worldviews Possible?
The discounting of future benefits is another concept
So long as the expansionist worldview continues to that has been targeted for attention. Under the neoclas-
be dominant, it is unlikely that sustainable develop- sical school, discounting is considered to be equally
ment can emerge as an effective framework for public applicable at both the individual and collective deci-
policy. The Brundtland definition will continue to serve sion-making levels. However, economists increasingly
as the guide to our “sustainable” future, despite its clear recognize that discounting should not be a factor in
inadequacy in that regard. The question becomes, what public policy decisions because it makes no sense
is the possibility that these two worldviews can be inte- (Jacobs 1991; Daly and Cobb 1989) and because it will
grated into one that builds on the strengths of both? inevitably lead to the overexploitation of resources and
In the view of many scientists and policy analysts, a failure to provide for the future (Howarth 1995; James,
the two worldviews are so fundamentally different that Nijkamp, and Opschoor 1989; Norgaard 1989; Tisdell
their integration is impossible (Rees 1995). As proposed 1988).
by Rees, sustainability “poses a far more serious chal- These examples are evidence that the mainstream,
lenge to many of society’s most basic beliefs and analyt- neoclassical school of economics has the potential to
ical concepts than most mainstream planners and evolve into a framework that is more consistent with
policymakers have been prepared to contemplate so the ecological worldview. However, how far can such a
far” (p. 347). Rather, what is widely perceived to be transformation be expected to go? Despite the fact that
needed is a paradigm shift, that is, a radical change in both institutional economics and steady-state econom-
our thinking and our personal and collective behavior. ics have been around for a long time, their impact on the
In exploring the potential for paradigmatic integra- neoclassical school as it is predominantly practiced has
tion, it may be useful to start with the field of econom- not been significant. According to Brown (2001), “the
ics, due to the prominence of its effects on public policy. gap between economists and ecologists in their percep-
At present and as previously noted, institutional/ tion of the world as the new century begins could not be
resource economics is perceived as an alternative rather wider” (p. 5). The commitment to growth does not seem
than a complement to the mainstream, neoclassical to be affected by worsening environmental and social
school. However, there have been some efforts to conditions (Daly, 1996). Capitalism stubbornly refuses
achieve an integration of the two paradigms. One such to assign any value to the natural capital stocks that it
effort is reflected in the “weak” and “strong” liquidates (Hawken, Lovins, and Hunter Lovins 1999).
sustainability debate, where there is agreement on both All of this is evidence the neoclassical school is not
sides that the economy should no longer be viewed as being fundamentally changed (i.e., the two worldviews
open. However, the more basic question regarding lim- are not really being integrated).
its to growth remains unresolved, since manmade and This failure of integration in the economic realm
natural capital are viewed as substitutes under the leads to an exploration of noneconomic realms. Ironi-
“weak” perspective and complements under the cally, the rationale for such an exploration outside eco-
“strong” (Rees 1995; Haughton and Hunter 1994). nomics is derived from one of its own schools of
Another example of attempted paradigmatic inte- thought, namely the institutional, with its proposition
gration is the emergence of “ecological” and “environ- that the so-called working rules of a society’s institu-
mental” economics, in which the neoclassical paradigm tions (including economic) derive from the conditions
is expanded to incorporate negative environmental of culture. This implies that people’s values and beliefs
externalities as a cost of economic activity (de Steiguer are the determinants of how their institutions will func-
1995; Jacobs 1991; Costanza 1989). Such a perspective tion. Thus, as people change, so will society’s
has the potential to protect the resource base as well as institutions.
provide for the pricing of goods and services so as to Drawing again from Rees (1995), the integration of
protect against their depletion. Related to this is the the two worldviews is possible. While the expansionist
agreement among many economists that the impor- worldview tends to rely on an inductive, linear model
tance of many benefits is not accurately measured by to understand the world, the model under an ecological
the market, resulting in an inadequate regulation of worldview is more systemic and deductive. These two
their consumption. One approach rooted in this recog- models differ fundamentally in that the former views
nition has been the substitution of “utilization” value nothing as being objectively unknowable, while the lat-
for “cash” value, which makes it possible to reduce the ter views much of nature and the world as being so.

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

8 Journal of Planning Literature

Clearly, this dimension of the two worldviews can be resilience, which is the ability to absorb and recover
integrated by a cultural embracing of the proposition from disturbance (Smith 1996; Munn, 1989). Under
that reason and logic are an acceptable basis for deci- these considerations, integration of the two worldviews
sion making in those instances when scientifically can be achieved under the premise that no limit to
proven evidence is not available or the scientific growth should be overcome to achieve growth in one
method is inadequate. This is the essence of the widely system if it pushes another system or subsystem
proposed “precautionary principle” (Harris et al. 2001, beyond its capacity for resilience. This requires (1) the
8). identification and delineation of relevant systems and
Another basic difference between the two subsystems and (2) the formulation of an estimate of
worldviews is their attitudes about human beings and their capacity to resist or recover from the effects of a
time. The expansionist worldview has as its principle particular disturbance (i.e., some activity being
frame of reference the individual in the present, considered within the human system).
whereas the ecological worldview is focused on the col- Successful efforts in the public sector to have reason,
lective, both now and in the future. While these atti- values, and development replace data, preferences, and
tudes would seem to be inherently conflicting, further growth as the basis on which decisions are made under
reflection reveals that this is not necessarily the case. specific conditions will result in changes to the so-called
Again, what is required is a differentiation between that working rules. They will now begin to reflect an inte-
which is knowable and that which is not knowable, as gration of both the expansionist and the ecological
well as an understanding of the difference between worldview, rather than the dominance of the former.
people behaving as consumers (decisions based on With economics being one of the institutions subsumed
preferences) as opposed to citizens (decisions based on within the broader culture, its theoretical framework
values) (Blamey and Common 1994; Jacobs 1991). will likewise experience change, moving away from the
Under decision-making conditions approaching full neoclassical school and toward the institutional. As a
knowledge, preference may be an acceptable criteria; result of such movement, society will be positioned to
however, under conditions of uncertainty, decisions develop more sustainably.
must be made on the basis of values, since it is necessary
to extend concern beyond the present and the individ-
THE RELEVANCE OF PLANNING
ual. Such a proposition finds support in the neoclassical TO WORLDVIEW INTEGRATION
school assumption of “perfect knowledge” as a
prerequisite for rational economic action (Weintraub On the basis of existing evidence, there is little to sug-
2003). gest that economic theory is likely to achieve an integra-
Drawing again from Rees (1995), another important tion of the expansionist and ecological worldviews. The
difference between the two worldviews is in the per- long-term and continuing failure of the institutional
spective each takes on growth. While the ecological school to supplant the neoclassical school as the domi-
worldview appreciates the importance of growth, it nant economic paradigm is evidence of the tenacity of
also recognizes the existence of limits. Such limits do the latter. However, a consideration of the noneconomic
not necessarily impinge on a system’s ability to dimensions of the two worldviews reveals some oppor-
improve and develop; rather, what is most important is tunities for integration. Drawing on institutional eco-
its ability to constantly organize for increased efficiency nomics, these opportunities can be used as a framework
(Giaoutzi 1990; Mollison 1990). The expansionist for planning interventions that will contribute to a
worldview, on the other hand, considers growth to be change in the working rules and the full range of insti-
paramount and views limits to such growth as some- tutional transactions, including economic.
thing that can and should be overcome. The question I propose four steps that can be taken by planners to
then becomes, in what instances might the growth man- improve their ability to contribute to an integration of
date be superceded by growth-limiting strategies, the two worldviews and increase the extent to which
derived from the premise that physical expansion is not the alternative, ecological worldview is institutional-
necessary for continued community improvement ized. These have been organized for discussion below
through development? By realizing that the growth under the headings of self-reflection, encouragement of
advocated under the expansionist worldview relates a planning society, analysis of context, and application
directly to human society or the economy as systems, of a decision model.
the focus of attention can then perhaps be placed on the
Self-Reflection
effects of such physical expansion on other, external
systems, as well as its constituent subsystems. More One of the first steps a planner might take to improve
important than growth to the success of a system is its his or her ability to integrate the expansionist and eco-

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

 Human Nature and Sustainable Development 9

logical worldviews is to better understand how his or dynamics require an educational process that is
her own values and preferences draw from both. Fail- incremental and, therefore, long-term.
ure to take such stock will make it more difficult for him The need for collaboration relates to the complexity
or her to serve effectively as either facilitator—which and the inherently conflictual nature of sustainable
requires an ability to identify and relate to planning development. Contributing, as indicated by Innes and
process participants—or expert informer—which Booher (1999), to innovation and enhanced cooperation
requires thinking outside the so-called black box (i.e., among a community’s individuals and institutions, a
the expansionist perspective). By strengthening and collaborative process is consistent with the need for a
expanding the principles that define his or her ecologi- collective break from the expansionist perspective. The
cal perspective and by recognizing and coming to terms capacity for such a break, however, varies among the
with the limitations imposed by his or her expansionist people who compose that collective. Any top-down,
perspective, a planner will be better able to improve the one-size-fits-all attempt to integrate sustainable devel-
process and add new strategic dimensions to an expan- opment into public policies is likely to be met with sig-
sionist-dominated planning effort. In essence, and fol- nificant opposition regardless of the amount of so-
lowing Kartez (1989) and Forester (1985), respectively, called expert reasoning supplied because—once
such reflection can “emancipate” planners, and enable again—it will tend to elicit a risk-averse response.
them to release themselves from self-imposed These, then, are the roots of the essential requirement of
constraints. a collaborative approach to planning for sustainable
Thus, when planners enter into a process totally con- development—to both avoid the emergence of strident
vinced of the need for (for example) alternative modes opposition as well as produce the necessary innovation
of transportation (drawn from the ecological perspec- and cooperation.
tive), they will not be surprised by the strenuous
Analysis of Context
counterarguments that emerge against such a strategy
or the lack of adequate taxpayer support. Recognition The nature of the education and process necessary to
of their own ownership of the countervailing views will integrate the two worldviews depends on the condi-
make it possible for planners to not only better accept tions and predispositions that exist among a commu-
them, but also to engage in an incremental effort to cre- nity’s individuals, organizations, and institutions.
atively deconstruct them. Such deconstruction can only Therefore, an additional challenge for planners
occur in a planning environment in which fears are becomes determining where a community lies in terms
acknowledged as valid and taking risks is recognized of its collective perspective (i.e., the extent to which is it
as essential to progress. dominated by the expansionist over the ecological).
Such determination will make it possible for planners
Encouragement of a Planning Society
to understand the range of policies and programs that
I suggest that the kind of environment that is most are feasible and provide insight into how the educa-
conducive to integration of the two worldviews corre- tional and process dimensions can be organized for
sponds to Kartez’s (1989) notion of a “planning society” optimal progress in relation to a sustainable
in which there is a commitment to long-term education development agenda.
and collaboration. The encouragement of such commit- An opinion survey distributed to residents or plan-
ment depends on planners understanding the long- ning process participants is one means to measure the
term character of the educational component of sustain- sustainable development potential of a community. By
able development. As previously noted, one of the char- drawing from the two worldviews, this survey can help
acteristics attributed to human beings is a tendency to planners determine the appropriate character and pos-
make decisions and form opinions on the basis of any- sible scope of visioning workshops and other participa-
thing other than the facts. If education is defined as the tory and educational dimensions of a citizen participa-
acquisition of “knowledge,” which, in turn is accepted tion process. Provided in Table 1 are some of the key
to consist of “facts” (as drawn from Webster’s New Colle- substantive and procedural dimensions that can be
giate Dictionary 1980), then the effects of education (that evaluated and sample questions that might be used.
is, the imparting of knowledge and facts) cannot be Because the answers to these questions will reveal the
assumed to be quickly transforming. Furthermore, the collective strength of the expansionist perspective
fact that the education necessary for sustainable devel- among residents or planning process participants,
opment will focus on doing and viewing things differ- planners will gain a better sense of the potential that
ently will tend to elicit a risk-averse response among exists for public policy changes.
those being educated, which is an extremely difficult Asking local stakeholders to provide a definition of
reaction to counteract or mitigate (Kartez 1989). These sustainable development is a means by which the

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

10 Journal of Planning Literature

TABLE 1.Citizen Opinion Survey

Substantive dimensions
A significant obstacle to wider embrace of the ecological worldview is the perception of ecology as a “frontier” area
that lacks the requisite scientific rigor to serve as a basis for the formulation of public policy (Carley and Christie 1993,
67; di Castri and Hadley 1986).
Sample question(s): How reliable are the principles of the science of ecology compared to those of chemistry?

Discounting continues to be considered to be a valid method of public policy analysis, despite the fact that it leads to a
present-orientation that makes it difficult to adequately consider future effects of present actions and will detract from
a community’s ability to make decisions as citizens rather than consumers.
Sample question(s): How far into the future should future impacts be considered equal to present impacts in the
making of public policy? How much control over your future do you feel that you have?

The expansionist worldview, with its roots in a Judeo-Christian foundation that holds man to have dominion over
nature, views nature and the environment as serving the needs of society and economy rather than having a value of
their own. Under the expansionist worldview, economic growth can be maintained indefinitely; The ecological
worldview, on the other hand, holds growth to be limited by the Earth’s carrying capacity, that is, its finite quantity of
sources (for production) and sinks (for waste disposal) (Meadows, Meadows, and Randers 1992). When translated into
community goals and objectives, the former perspective will tend to downgrade the importance of open space and
resource preservation relative to the need for development
Sample question(s): Do you feel more strongly that nature is something to be utilized or something to be protected?
Which do you feel is the more significant determinant of future economic growth,
human ingenuity or natural resources?

The expansionist perspective tends to view economic activity as mechanistic and thus more rightly severed from
public policy. As a result, it will be less receptive to the formulation of government policy that is potentially disruptive
of market-related functions.

Sample question(s): How legitimate is the regulation of business as a function of government policy? How strongly
do you feel that businesses should be held accountable for adverse social and environmental consequences?

Procedural dimensions
The collaborative process model calls for wide and meaningful involvement of knowledgeable citizens and interest
groups in the planning and decision-making process, as well as cooperation and coordination among government
agencies. This procedural model is consistent with ecosystem theory, which emphasizes the importance of effective
communication among a multitude of agents within a system as a prelude to coordinated and effective action (Lyle
1994; Giaoutzi 1990; Mollison 1990).
Sample question(s): How important it that a diversity of views be encouraged as input into public policy?
How important is it that city government agencies coordinate their activities? How important is
education as a means by which opinions should be formulated?

Under system theory, every system is a subsystem of some larger system on which it depends. Each subsystem is also
an interacting agent within a system. Because the success of a system (e.g., a community) requires coordination of
effort at both the inter- and intrasystemic level, it is necessary that decisions take into account external impacts and
effects (Simon 1962; Mollison 1990).
Sample question(s): How much should consideration of people and environments in other countries be used to
determine local actions? How important do you feel it is that your community’s actions and
plans be coordinated with those of other communities in the region?

nature of their involvement in a planning process can be a merging of the two. Is the definition composed pri-
predicted. As discussed above, the words and phrases marily of recognizable rhetoric or is it an original and
used can help planners determine if the definition thoughtful statement? On the basis of this analysis,
reflects the expansionist or the ecological perspective or stakeholder meetings can be organized so as to better

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

 Human Nature and Sustainable Development 11

balance the two perspectives. For example, if an organi- Transactive facilitator. In this role, the planner is a prime
zation uses the World Commission on Environment organizer of a bargaining process in which actors are
and Development definition of sustainable develop- focused on learning about each other and the issues,
ment, or if its definition includes such words as “price” and the achievement of change consistent with values
and the improvement of society (Fainstein and
and “utilize,” the planner can recognize the organiza-
Fainstein 1982; Hudson 1979).
tion as likely having only marginal potential to contrib-
Progressive advocate. In search of an overriding public
ute to the furthering of a sustainable development interest, the planner in this role encourages and pro-
agenda. On the other hand, a definition that is lengthy vides for the involvement of interest groups in the plan-
and multidimensional and includes such terms as ning process to support his or her advocacy of particu-
“feedback” and “carrying capacity” might be the sign lar goals and values (Kraushaar 1988; Forester 1982;
of an organization that can serve as a balance to the Davidoff 1965).
expansionist perspective. Planners can use this infor-
mation to classify stakeholders engaged in a given Using the discussion above and in the preceding sec-
planning process and to prepare an appropriate tion as a basis, it is possible to formulate a decision
strategy. model that can be used by planners to help them
Finally, planners might undertake to classify various become better positioned to contribute to integration of
public policies and programs in relation to the compo- the two worldviews and, therefore, increase the
nents of the two worldviews, thereby increasing their institutionalization of the alternative, ecological per-
ability to estimate the likelihood of their implementa- spective. Assumed to be applied under the so-called
tion. For example, under the expansionist perspective, planning society conditions as described above, this
greenway development—which increases residents’ model would use context and project characteristics to
access to open space and community assets—would be help point to a particular method of evaluation and
more likely to be adopted than a wildlife corridor strat- planner role as being most appropriate, as shown in
egy, which protects open space for reasons related to Table 2.
biology. Likewise, a transfer of development rights pro-
In Table 2, project types are grouped according to
gram is less likely to meet resistance than an urban
project characteristics and then subgrouped according
growth boundary, the latter of which is more threaten-
to context (i.e., Type 1a depicts a project with the same
ing to the functions of the market. (In fact, both of these
project characteristics as Type 1b but in a different con-
propositions are supported by survey results reported
text). Table 2 does not include all possible scenarios but
by Jepson 2003).
is only intended to serve as an illustration as to how the
Decision Model two drivers (project characteristics and context) can
help determine method and planner role. For example,
I propose that the extent to which the expansionist a Type 1a project depicts an expansionist context com-
and ecological worldviews are integrated at the local bined with a high state of knowledge relative to a low-
level depends on the context in which decisions are impact expansionist project. This might involve the
made and the characteristics of a particular proposal or rehabilitation of a central city industrial site for new
strategy. The challenge facing planners is to formulate industrial use in a community that has suffered eco-
an appropriate response in terms of their role and the nomic downturn. Under this combination of drivers—
planning process. I further propose that (1) there are no conflict—the indicated approach is implementation
four possible roles that a planner can play in relation to of the project with the planner’s role being that of tech-
the challenge of such worldview integration and (2) nician. This method and role holds up under all Type 1
there is a consistent requirement across all roles for the scenarios except the last, under a “d” context, where
detection and exposure/elimination of lies and distor- there is a conflict in worldviews. An illustration of this
tions, as per critical theory (Forester 1980). project type would be an industrial development pro-
ject strongly supported by an influential development
Technician. In this role, the planner is primarily concerned group or groups in a community that is predisposed to
with the gathering and analysis of data and integrating
exaggerate or incorrectly perceive a threat to a valued
this as information into the decision-making process
(Christensen 1985; Forester 1982; Hudson 1979).
environmental asset. In such a case, and keeping in
Incremental facilitator. In this role, the planner enters a bar- mind that the intent is not replace the expansionist
gaining process in which actors are focused on achiev- worldview with the ecological but rather to integrate
ing incremental change in relation to preferences, func- them, it may be most appropriate for the planner to
tional objectives, and the delivery of goods and services assume an advocacy role in support of the expansionist
(Christensen 1985; Forester 1982; Hudson 1979). project.

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

 12
TABLE 2.A Decision Model That Integrates Context and Project Characteristics to Help Determine Appropriate Method of Evaluation and Planner Role
Drivers of Method and Planner Role
Context Project Characteristics
Interest
Citizen Groups Other Compatible Method of
Worldviewa Worldviewb Knowledgec System Impactsd Worldviewe Evaluationf Planner Roleg
Reason/ Incr Trans Prog
Project Typeh Exp Eco Exp Eco High Moderate Low High Moderate Low Exp Eco Data Values Logic Tech Facil Facil Adv

Type 1a × × × × × × ×
Type 1b × × × × × × ×
Type 1c × × × × × × ×
Type 1d × × × × × × ×
Type 2a × × × × × × ×
Type 2b × × × × × × × ×
Type 3c × × × × × × ×
Type 3d × × × × × × ×

a. Determined through citizen survey.

b. Determined through interest group evaluation.
c. The extent to which decisions can be guided by actual knowledge of impacts.
d. The extent to which the project is known or anticipated to exceed the resilience of other systems.
e. The worldview with which the project is most consistent.
f. The most appropriate methodological strategy(ies), where data = the presentation of adequate scientific data and/or analysis, values = consideration and application

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

of collective values, and reason/logic = appeal to and application of reason and logic.
g. The most appropriate planner role in relation to the methodological strategy(ies).
h. The number of the project type relates to the project characteristic dimensions and the letter relates to the project context dimensions. A complete table based on this
categorization methodology provides a means by which the appropriate planner role can be systematically identified.
 Human Nature and Sustainable Development 13

The Type 2b project involves worldview consensus REFERENCES

(i.e., expansionist) in relation to an expansionist project Ayres, R. U., and A. V. Kneese. 1989. Externalities: Economics and
with high system impacts that are difficult to document. thermodynamics. In Economy and ecology: Towards sustainable devel-
In this case, interest groups are most likely to oppose the opment, edited by F. Archibugi and P. Nijkamp. Boston: Kluwer.
project, since they have a strong ecological perspective. Barbier, E. B. 1987. The concept of sustainable economic development.
Environmental Conservation 14 (2): 101-10.
Since this scenario involves a basic clash of values and a
Beatley, T. 1989. Environmental ethics and planning theory. Journal of
scarcity of scientific data, it is perhaps most appropriate Planning Literature 4 (1): 1-32.
for the planner to implement a transactive process in . 1995. Planning and sustainability: The elements of a new
which citizens and interest groups are encouraged to (improved?) paradigm. Journal of Planning Literature 9 (4): 383-95.
engage in reasonable discussion about the relative mer- Beatley, T., and K. Manning. 1997. The ecology of place: Planning for envi-
its of the project. On the other hand, a Type 3c project, in ronment, economy, and community. Washington, DC: Island Press.
which conflict and impacts are both low, will probably Berke, P. A. 1995. Natural-hazard reduction and sustainable develop-
ment: A global assessment. Journal of Planning Literature 9 (4): 370-
only require the planner to facilitate an incremental 82.
process that focuses on a discussion of preferences. Berke, P. A., and J. Kartez. 1995. Sustainable development as a guide to
land use policy. Research paper. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of
Land Policy.
CONCLUSION Berke, P. A., and M. Manta Conroy. 2000. Are we planning for sustain-
able development? Journal of the American Planning Association 66
(1): 1-13.
Sustainable development is becoming increasingly
Biddle, J. E. 1990. Purpose and evolution in Commons’s
accepted as a framework for planning. Planning docu- institutionalism. History of Political Economy 22 (1): 19-47.
ments are being prepared that have sustainable devel- Blamey, R., and M. Common. 1994. Sustainability and the limits to
opment as their conceptual basis. However, this basis is pseudo market valuation. In Toward sustainable development, edited
not being carried through into actual policies and pro- by J. C. J. M. van den Bergh and J. van der Straaten. Washington, DC:
Island Press.
grams. This paper proposes that the reconciliation and
Brown, L. R. 2001. Eco-economy: Building an economy for the earth. New
effective integration of two seemingly conflicting York: W. W. Norton.
worldviews, the expansionistic and the ecological, may Campbell, S. 1996. Green cities, growing cities, just cities? Journal of the
be a key to achieving more consistency between con- American Planning Association 62 (3): 296-312.
cept and action. The intersectional positioning of sus- Carley, M., and I. Christie. 1993. Managing sustainable development.
tainable development between two worldviews makes Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
it, in the words of Kartez (1989), particularly prone to Chasse, J. D. 1986. John R. Commons and the democratic state. Journal
of Economic Issues 20 (3): 759-84.
“wildly different conclusions” and the holding of views
Christensen, K. S. 1985. Coping with uncertainty in planning. Journal
with extreme “rigidity.” Therefore, what is needed for of the American Planning Association 51 (1): 63-73.
its furtherance are planners as leaders who (1) under- Commons, J. R. 1931. Institutional economics. American Economic
stand and appreciate the roots and dimensions of these Review 21 (December): 648-57.
two perspectives as they exist both within themselves Costanza, R. 1989. What is ecological economics? Ecological Economics
as well as in others and (2) have a clear notion as to 1 (1): 1-7.
appropriate method and role under varying circum- Daly, H. E. 1968. On economics as a life science. Journal of Political Econ-
omy 76 (May/June): 392-406.
stances. Such understanding on the part of planners
. 1989. Steady-state and growth concepts for the next century.
will contribute to their ability to act as facilitators, In Economy and ecology: Towards sustainable development, edited by F.
appropriately identify stakeholders, provide relevant Archibugi and P. Nijkamp. Boston: Kluwer.
information, propose viable alternatives, and adminis- . 1996. Beyond growth: The economics of sustainable development.
ter constructive, collaborative processes. As planners Boston: Beacon.
succeed in these ways, an integration of the two Daly, H. E., and J. B. Cobb Jr. 1989. For the common good. Boston: Beacon.
worldviews may begin to occur and communities may Davidoff, D. 1965. Advocacy and pluralism in planning. Journal of the
American Institute of Planners 31 (4): 331-38.
find themselves increasingly better able to absorb the
Despotakis, V., M. Giaoutzi, and P. Nijkamp. 1992. Spatial depiction of
range of challenges and contradictions that are intrinsic local sustainable development. In M. J. Breheny (Ed.), Sustainable
to development in today’s world. development and urban form. London: Pion.
de Steiguer, J. E. 1995. Three theories from economics about the envi-
ronment. BioScience 45 (8): 552-57.
NOTE
di Castri, F., and M. Hadley. 1986. Enhancing the credibility of ecol-
1. A detailed, point-by-point property or quality comparison of ogy: Is interdisciplinary research for land use planning useful?
the expansionist and ecological worldviews can be found in Rees GeoJournal 13 (4): 299-325.
(1995). Dubos, R. 1981. Celebrations of life. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

14 Journal of Planning Literature

Dugger, W. 1984. Methodological differences between institutional Towards sustainable development, edited by F. Archibugi and P.
and neoclassical economics. In D. M. Hausman (Ed.), The philosophy Nijkamp. Boston: Kluwer.
of economics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Jepson, E. J., Jr. 2001. Sustainability and planning: Diverse concepts
Dwyer, J. F., H. W. Schroeder, and P. H. Gobster. 1994. The deep signifi- and close associations. Journal of Planning Literature 15 (4): 499-510.
cance of urban trees and forests. In The ecological city: Preserving and . 2003. The adoption of sustainable development policies and
restoring urban biodiversity. Amherst: University of Massachusetts techniques in U.S. cities: How wide, how deep, and what role for
Press. planners? Journal of Planning Education and Research 23 (2): 1-13.
Ekins, P. 1993. ‘Limits to growth’ and ‘sustainable development’: Jones, A. 1996. The psychology of sustainability: What planners can
Grappling with ecological realities. Ecological Economics 8 (3): 269- learn from attitude research. Journal of Planning Education and
88. Research 16 (1): 56-65.
Fainstein, N. I., and S. S. Fainstein. 1982. New debates in urban plan- Kartez, J. D. 1989. Rational arguments and irrational audiences. Jour-
ning: The impact of Marxist theory within the United States. In Crit- nal of the American Planning Association 55 (4): 445-56.
ical readings in planning theory, edited by C. Paris. New York:
Pergamon. Kinsley, M. 1994. Sustainable development—prosperity without
growth. Public Management October:6-9.
Forester, J. 1980. Critical theory and planning practice. Journal of the
American Planning Association 46 (3): 275-86. Kraushaar, R. 1988. Outside the whale: Progressive planning and the
dilemma of radical reform. Journal of the American Planning Associa-
. 1982. Planning in the face of power. Journal of the American tion 54 (1): 91-100.
Planning Association 48 (1): 67-80.
Lyle, J. T. 1994. Regenerative design for sustainable development. New
. 1985. Practical rationality in plan making. In Rationality in York: John Wiley.
planning: Critical essays on the role of rationality in urban and regional
planning, edited by M. Breheny and A. Hooper. London: Pion. Lynch, K. 1981. Good city form. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Insti-
tute of Technology.
Garbarino, J. 1992. Toward a sustainable society. Chicago: Noble.
Meadows, D. H., D. L. Meadows, and J. Randers. 1992. Beyond the lim-
Georgescu-Roegen, N. 1971. The entropy law and the economic problem. its. Post Mills, VT: Chelsea Green.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mollison, B. 1990. Permaculture: A practical guide for a sustainable future.
Giaoutzi, M. 1990. Complexity in urban dynamics: A Greek example. Washington, DC: Island Press.
In Sustainability of urban systems, edited by P. Nijkamp. Brookfield,
VT: Grower. Munn, R. E. 1989. Towards sustainable development: An environ-
mental perspective. In Economy and ecology: Towards sustainable
Girardet, H. 1992. The Gaia atlas of cities. New York: Doubleday. development, edited by F. Archibugi and P. Nijkamp. Boston:
Gottlieb, P. D. 1995. The “golden egg” as a natural resource: Toward a Kluwer.
normative theory of growth management. Society and Natural Nijkamp, P., P. Lasschuit, and F. Soeteman. 1992. Sustainable develop-
Resources 8 (1): 49-56. ment in a regional system. In Sustainable development and urban form,
Hardin, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162 (December): edited by M. J. Breheny. London: Pion.
1243-48. Norgaard, R. B. 1989. The case for methodological pluralism. Ecologi-
Harper, T. L., and S. M. Stein. 1995. Planning theory for environmen- cal Economics 1 (1): 37-57.
tally sustainable planning. Paper presented at the annual meeting Platt, R. H. 1994. The ecological city: Introduction and overview. In
of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Detroit, MI, The ecological city: Preserving and restoring urban diversity, edited by
October. R. H. Platt, R. A. Rowntree, and P. C. Muick. Amherst: University of
Harris, C. C., and M. McGown. 1990. The propriety of applying eco- Massachusetts Press.
nomic methods to the allocation of public amenity resources: Para- Proops, J. L. R. 1989. Ecological economics: Rationale and problem
digms, property rights, and progress. In Economic valuation of natu- areas. Ecological Economics 1 (1): 59-76.
ral resources, edited by R. L. Johnson and G. Johnson. Boulder, CO:
Westview. Rees, W. E. 1989. Defining “sustainable development.” CHS Research
Bulletin. Vancouver, BC: Center for Human Settlements, University
Harris, J. M., T. A. Wise, K. P. Gallagher, and N. R. Goodwin. 2001. A of British Columbia.
survey of sustainable development: Social and economic dimensions.
Washington, DC: Island Press. . 1990. Planning for sustainable development: A resource book. Pro-
ceedings of a symposium organized by the School of Community
Hart, M., M. Mazzotta, and K. Kellman. 1999. Measuring sustainability: and Regional Planning, the University of British Columbia,
An assessment of criteria for defining and selecting sustainability indica- November 25-27, 1988. Vancouver, BC: Centre for Human
tors. Montpelier, VT: Green Mountain Institute for Environmental Settlements.
Democracy.
. 1992. Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capac-
Haughton, G., and C. Hunter. 1994. Sustainable cities. London: Jessica ity: What urban economics leaves out. Environment and Urbaniza-
Kingsley. tion 4 (2): 121-30.
Hawken, P., A. Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins. 1999. Natural capitalism: . 1995. Achieving sustainability: Reform or transformation?
Creating the next industrial revolution. Boston: Little, Brown. Journal of Planning Literature 9 (4): 343-61.
Howarth, R. B. 1995. Sustainability under uncertainty: A Rees, W. E., and M. Roseland. 1991. Sustainable communities: Plan-
deontological approach. Land Economics 71 (4), 417-27. ning for the 21st century. Plan Canada 31 (3): 15-26.
Hudson, B. 1979. Comparison of current planning theories. Journal of Ruckelshaus, W. D. 1989. Toward a sustainable world. Scientific Amer-
the American Planning Association 45 (4): 387-98. ican 261 (3): 166-74.
Innes, J. E., and D. E. Booher. 1999. Consensus building and complex Rutherford, M. 1983. J. R. Commons’s institutional economics. Journal
adaptive systems: A framework for evaluating collaborative plan- of Economic Issues 17 (3): 721-44.
ning. Journal of the American Planning Association 65 (4): 412-23.
Rydin, Y. 1992. Environmental impacts and the property market. In M.
Jacobs, M. 1991. The green economy: Environment, sustainable develop- J. Breheny (Ed.), Sustainable development and urban form. London:
ment and the politics of the future. Concord, MA: Pluto. Pion.
James, D. E., P. Nijkamp, and J. B. Opschoor. 1989. Ecological Scruggs, P. 1993. Chapter 1: Definitions and principles. In Guidelines
sustainability and economic development. In Economy and ecology: for state level sustainable development, edited by S. Park. Chapel Hill:

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015

 Human Nature and Sustainable Development 15

Center for Policy Alternatives and Environmental Resource Pro- Webster’s new collegiate dictionary. 1980. Springfield, MA: G. & C.
gram, University of North Carolina. Merriam.
Simon, H. A. 1962. The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our
American Philosophical Society 16 (1): 41-48. common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Smit, B., and M. Brklacich. 1989. Sustainable development and the Wackernagel, M., and W. Rees. 1996. Our ecological footprint. Gabriola
analysis of rural systems. Journal of Rural Studies 5 (4): 405-14. Island, BC, Canada: New Society.
Smith, T. W. 1996. Sustainable communities in the urban-rural inter- Weintraub, E. R. 2003. Neoclassical economics. In the concise
face. Small Town & Rural Planning March:8-12. encyclopedia of economics, www.econlib.org/library/Enc/
Spain, D. 1995. Sustainability, feminist visions, and the utopian tradi- NenclassicalEconomics.html.
tion. Journal of Planning Literature 9 (4): 362-69. White, R. R. 1994. Urban environmental management. New York: John
Stone, P. A. 1973. The structure, size, and costs of urban settlements. Cam- Wiley.
bridge, UK: University Printing House. van den Bergh, J. C. J. M., and J. van der Straaten, eds. 1994. The signifi-
Thomas, D. K., and O. J. Furuseth. 1997. The realities of incorporating cance of sustainable development for ideas, tools, and policy. In
sustainable development into local-level planning: A case study of Toward sustainable development. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Davidson, North Carolina. Cities 14 (4): 219-26.
Tisdell, C. A. 1988. Environmental conservation: Economics, ecology,
and ethics. Environmental Conservation 16 (2): 107-308.

Downloaded from jpl.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on March 15, 2015