From sustainable development to social-ecological justice: Addressing taboos and naturalizations in order to shift perspective

Abstract

While sustainability was introduced as a game-changing idea, it has often been criticized for its vagueness and its over-accommodating bent toward powerful, vested interests, economic growth, and profit seeking—or, on the contrary, for not being able to enter mainstream politics. As a result, in the current political climate, sustainability policies seem to be everywhere, but so does the social and ecological critique of these policies. In this article, we articulate the seeds of an emerging cross-sectoral shift away from sustainability and toward social-ecological justice. Coming from a multidisciplinary background, we explore commonalities in the shortcomings of sustainability agendas and identify discursive barriers to change across three critical fields: transport, energy, and urban greening. Within each of these fields, we observe an upswing of scholarly work addressing the pitfalls and trade-offs of sustainability, but we also show how taboos and naturalizations embedded in these fields hinder adequately questioning the economy’s role in sustainability thinking and action. To develop our argument that there is an emerging cross-sectoral push away from sustainability agendas and toward social-ecological justice goals, we briefly examine the current state of the wider sustainability discourse together with its critique from a social and ecological justice angle. We then review relevant academic work across the applied fields of transport, energy, and urban greening, focusing on the normative and analytical aspects dealt with, and how they address and conceptualize tensions between the different dimensions of sustainability. In the concluding section, we highlight how a focus on sectoral and local tensions between ecological, economic, and social policy goals uncovers the ways in which injustices or environmental degradation are continually reproduced, despite the sustainability framework. We conclude with suggestions for thinking and acting under the umbrella of social-ecological justice