Search

The purpose of this paper is to give a comprehensive and cohesive description of the most recent version of the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD), and also to describe and discuss the overall method for developing the FSSD, elaborate on the general rational for and general benefits of a framework of this type, and validate benefits of the FSSD through examples of its application. The purpose is also to point to pertinent future work. In preparation of this paper, we have reviewed previous publications and other documents related to the FSSD and reflected on the 25-year learning process between scientists and practitioners. We conclude that the FSSD has proven to aid organizations in thoroughly understanding and putting themselves in context of the global sustainability challenge, and to move themselves strategically towards sustainability, i.e., to stepwise reduce their negative impacts on ecological and social systems at large while strengthening the own organization through capturing of innovation opportunities, including new business models, exploration of new markets and winning of new market shares, and through reduced risks and operation costs. Specifically, we conclude that the FSSD aids more effective management of system boundaries and trade-offs, makes it possible to model and assess sustainable potentials for various materials and practices before investments are made, and offers the possibility for more effective collaboration across disciplines and sectors, regions, value-chains and stakeholder groups. We also conclude that the FSSD makes it possible to prevent damages, even from yet unknown problems, and not the least, to guide selection, development and combination of supplementary methods, tools, and other forms of support, which makes it possible to increase their utility for strategic sustainable development. Finally, we have shown that the FSSD is useful for structuring transdisciplinary academic education and research. Several examples of ongoing FSSD related research, as well as ideas for future work, are given. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The un-sustainable course of our societies is the greatest threat humanity has ever confronted. The biophysical systems upon which we are totally dependent have not been challenged by human activities at the global scale before and our impacts upon those planetary systems, as well as upon our social systems, cannot be adequately addressed by ad hoc solutions. Science and leadership will be required to address this threat and transform our current societies into sustainable societies. This Special Volume presents an evolving, yet increasingly cohesive, science-based perspective on leadership towards sustainability. Examples of crucial, overall questions addressed by authors of articles in this Special Volume are: How can science help to clarify sustainability as a foundational platform for success for society's core institutions (e.g. business, governance and education), and how can this platform inform envisioning, planning, monitoring, communication and decision making to accelerate the needed transitions? The conceptual framing of sustainable development in this Special Volume is based upon the logic that it is only if we can define sustainability in a scientifically solid way, as a frame for any vision, that we can analyze current situations in relation to such sustainable visions, and design strategies to close the gap to such visions. In moving from current situations towards possible sustainable futures, specific support in the form of leadership concepts, methods, tools, and requirements are also essential, i.e. given clarity around what needs to be achieved, effective leadership then requires knowing how to achieve it. Both the what and the how questions are addressed in this Special Volume. The research described provides a foundation for moving from ad hoc activities to systemic, systematic and strategic transitions towards sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The prisoners' dilemma is a game-theoretical construct about trust. It can be seen as a simple version of the ‘tragedy of the commons’, which is often used in the sustainability context as a metaphor for the tension between responsibility for common resources and the perceived self-benefit to individual organizations, regions or nations who neglect such responsibility in the short term. However, other game theory and developments in sustainability science imply that the prisoners' dilemma mind-set is delusive and misleading for both business and policy making. It helps obscure an even more important aspect of proactive leadership for sustainability: the potential self-benefit of understanding the dynamics of major system change better than one's ‘competitors’ . The UN 1972, 1992, and 2012 summits on sustainability, as well as the many summits on climate change, have been valuable milestones for influencing societal leadership at all levels. However, due to the prisoners' dilemma mind-set, they have also indirectly helped reinforce the idea that sustainability only pays off if the costs of achieving it are shared by all. That, in turn, has encouraged decision makers to believe that ’our organization's, region's or nation's sustainability activity must rely on policy making changing the rules of the game for everybody’. This focus on policy making as the only or main facilitator of sustainability efforts delays the needed transition of global society. By considering game theory such as tit-for-tat and modern systems science for sustainability, this paper illuminates major shortcomings of the prisoners' dilemma in the context of sustainability, and attempts to provide a more fruitful mind-set that can be motivated both theoretically and empirically. It is argued that a large part of the self-benefit of proactivity for sustainability is direct , i.e. independent of other actors' actions for the common good. In addition, it is argued that the self-benefit to businesses can be further increased through voluntary collaboration with other businesses to promote the common good, as well as through collaboration between proactive businesses and policy makers. Currently, none of this is intelligently and operationally part of mainstream leadership and public discourse on sustainability. The clarifications provided in this paper can lead to a much needed shift in mind-set among many leaders, not least political leaders, many of which seem to be trapped in simplistic prisoners' dilemma thinking and who act accordingly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The vast and growing array of concepts, methods and tools in the sustainability field imply a need for a structuring and coordinating framework, including a unifying and operational definition of sustainability. One attempt at such framework began over 25 years ago and is now widely known as the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development. However, as with the larger sustainability field, the social dimension of this framework has been found to not be sufficiently science-based and operational and thus in need of further development. In this two-part series an attempt at a science-based, operational definition of social sustainability is presented. In this paper (part one), a systems-based approach to the social system is presented, as a basis for presenting a zero-hypothesis of principles for social sustainability in part two. Extensive literature studies as well as conceptual modelling sessions were performed and the social system was examined from various angles – complex adaptive system studies, human needs theory and other social sciences, and insights from these fields were woven together. The whole work was structured and guided by the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development. The focus of the study was on the essential aspects of the social system that need to be sustained (that cannot be systematically degraded) for it to be possible for people to meet their needs. These essential aspects were found to be trust , common meaning , diversity , capacity for learning and capacity for self-organization . Trust seems to be generally acknowledged to be the overriding aspect of a vital social system. A sense of common meaning is also stated by several authors as an important part of social capital and something that helps to keep a group or society together. Diversity is acknowledged as essential for resilience; in the human social system this can be interpreted as, e.g., diversity of personalities, ages, gender, skills. Capacity for learning and self-organization are also motivated from a resilience point of view by several authors. These results form a basis for the hypothesis for a definition of social sustainability presented in paper 2, which in turn is a step towards creating an enhanced support for strategic planning and innovation for sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Electric vehicles seem to offer a great potential for sustainable transport development. The Swedish pioneer project GreenCharge Southeast is designed as a cooperative action research approach that aims to explore a roadmap for a fossil-free transport system by 2030 with a focus on electric vehicles. It is the following combination of objectives that puts demand on a new process model adapted for cross-sector and cross-disciplinary cooperation: (i) a fossil-free transport system in Sweden by 2030 and, to avoid sub-optimizations in the transport sector, (ii) assuring that solutions that support (i) also serve other aspects of sustainability in the transport sector and, to avoid that sustainable solutions in the transport sector block sustainable solutions in other sectors, (iii) assuring cohesive creativity across sectors and groups of experts and stakeholders. The new process model was applied in an action-research mode for the exploration of electric vehicles within a fully sustainable transport system to test the functionality of the model in support of its development. To deliver on the above combination of objectives, a framework was needed with principles for sustainability that are universal for any sector as boundary conditions for redesign, and with guidelines for how any organization or sector can create economically feasible step-by-step transition plans. The Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD) is designed to serve such purposes and therefore is embedded into the new process model. The exploration of this new model also helped to identify four interdependent planning perspectives (‘Resource base’, ‘Spatial’, ‘Technical’ and ‘Governance’) that should be represented by the respective experts and stakeholders using the model. In general, the new process model proved helpful by giving diverse stakeholders with various competences and representing various planning perspectives a common, robust, and easy-to-understand goal and a way of working that was adequate for each of their contexts. Furthermore, the evolving process model likely is relevant and useful not only for transport planning and electric vehicles, but for any other societal sector as well and thus for sustainable community planning in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The vast and growing array of concepts, methods and tools in the sustainability field imply a need for a structuring and coordinating framework, including a unifying and operational definition of sustainability. One attempt at such framework began over 25 years ago and is now widely known as the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development. However, as with the larger sustainability field, the social dimension of this framework has been found to not be sufficiently science-based and operational and thus in need of further development. In this two-part series an attempt at a science-based, operational definition of social sustainability is presented. In part 1 a systems-based approach to the social system was presented, based on extensive literature studies as well as conceptual modelling sessions using the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development as the guiding structure. The focus of that study was on the essential aspects of the social system that need to be sustained, namely trust , common meaning , diversity , capacity for learning and capacity for self-organization . The aim of this second paper is to identify and present overriding mechanisms by which these aspects of the social system can be degraded, thereby finding exclusion criteria for re-design for sustainability. Further literature studies, conceptual modelling sessions and initial testing of this prototype with partners in academia, business and NGOs were performed. Based on the understanding of the essential aspects of the social system and the identified overriding mechanisms of degradation of these, a hypothesis for a definition of social sustainability by basic principles is presented. The proposed principles are that in a socially sustainable society, people are not subject to structural obstacles to: (1) health, (2) influence, (3) competence, (4) impartiality and (5) meaning-making. Overall, the two papers aim to provide a hypothesis for a definition of social sustainability, which is general enough to be applied irrespective of spatial and temporal constraints, but concrete enough to guide decision-making and monitoring. It is also a further development of the social dimension of the FSSD, which practitioners and researchers have requested for some time and can act as a support towards better integration of social sustainability in many other fields, e.g., sustainable product innovation, sustainable supply chain management, sustainable transport system development, and others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Increasing awareness in business and society regarding socio-ecological impacts related to society's use of materials is a driver of new materials management practices. The aim of this study is to gain insight into what considerations come into focus and what types of solutions are revealed when companies apply a strategic sustainability perspective to materials management. Through literature reviews and semi-structured interviews we found that the companies studied have assessed material choices and related management actions, not only regarding their potential to reduce a selection of current socio-ecological impacts, but also regarding their potential to link to future actions to move towards the full scope of socio-ecological sustainability. Through this approach, these companies have found several ways through which materials with characteristics that are commonly considered problematic can be managed sustainably by making strategic use of some of these “problematic” characteristics and other characteristics of the materials. For example, a material associated with problems at end of life, could be managed in closed loops facilitated by the persistence of the material. Based on the findings, we conclude that by not applying a strategic sustainability perspective to materials management, organizations risk phasing out materials perceived to be unsustainable which, managed differently, could be helpful for sustainable development. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: There is a growing need to understand how existing concepts and tools for sustainability relate to each other and to a robust, trans-disciplinary systems perspective for sustainability. As a response, a group of scientists, including some of the authors, have developed a framework based on backcasting from sustainability principles over the last 20 years – the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD), also known as The Natural Step Framework. The intent of this study is to scrutinize the existing framework as regards its social dimension. The study demonstrates dichotomies and lack of robustness and proposes a way forward to make the social dimension of the FSSD more cohesive as well as operational. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Successful business is increasingly about understanding the challenges and opportunities linked to society's transition towards sustainability and, e.g., being able to innovate, design and build business models that are functional in this context. However, current business model innovation and design generally fails to sufficiently embrace the sustainability dimension. Typically, the business case of sustainability is not understood profoundly enough; the planning horizon and system scope are insufficient; the competence to bring together people into systematic ventures towards sustainable business is too low. A unifying framework for sustainability analyses, planning, cross-disciplinary and cross-sector cooperation, and cohesive use of the myriad sustainability tools, methods and concepts has been developed: the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD). Similarly, a generic approach to business model design has been put forward: the Business Model Canvas (BMC). In this paper we explore how the FSSD could inform business model innovation and design by combining it with the BMC and supplementary tools, methods and concepts such as creativity techniques, value network mapping, life-cycle assessment, and product-service systems. The results show that the FSSD-BMC combination can support business model innovation and design for strategic sustainable development, as well as strengthen each supplementary tool, method and concept in its own primary purpose. We apply the combined approach, for the purpose of initial testing and presentation, to a real case of business model evolution. Based on our findings we propose a new approach to business model innovation and design for strategic sustainable development. The new approach facilitates, e.g., business scalability and risk avoidance and clarifies the interplay between classical business model development and strategic sustainability thinking. The new approach highlights the opportunity for novel business model design for future sustainable success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Urban sustainable development is today seen as one of the keys towards unlocking the quest for a sustainable world. One feature of urban sustainability is the increased interest in developing sustainable urban districts. For many of these developments, guiding sustainability documents are developed to frame future goals. However, few of these documents specify on which grounds they determine the sustainability of goals and they are largely developed as independent islands of local sustainability. This is unfortunate as cities and their districts are fully dependent on surrounding environments. Failing to include a holistic approach into the local planning increases the risk of sub-optimisation, future lock-ins and missed targets on a higher level. The aim of this study is to analyse whether the environmental and sustainability programme for Stockholm Royal Seaport, a new urban district in Stockholm, Sweden, can guide development of the district towards holistic ecological sustainability. By using the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development a holistic template for an ecologically sustainable planet has been described, important sectors for the built environment have been identified and the environmental and sustainability programme for the district has been analysed. This study showed that the vision and operational goals put forward in the Stockholm Royal Seaport programme complies relatively well with the designed template. However, important deviations in all sectors but land use have been identified. These deviations arise in the translation process between theory and practice. The vision for the district and the implementation phase are not aligned due to too narrow a perspective of a sustainable urban district, lack of robust sustainability principles including use of such to identify key strategic questions. In addition to the lack of an all-embracing conceptual framework, there is also a lack of structures for cooperation between stakeholders and conflicts between local and regional agendas. Use of a unifying framework can describe desirable future scenarios where the local level does not contribute to violation of the universal sustainability principles and identify step-wise routes towards such scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This article aims to explore a new approach to assess company decision systems regarding sustainability-related communication and decision support between senior management and product development levels. The assessment approach was developed in theory and its applicability was directly tested in action research in two small and medium-sized companies and two large companies. The results were validated against experiences made by two management consultancies. Our study indicates that successful companies should: (i) integrate sustainability into business goals and plans, backed up by suitable (ii) internal incentives and disincentives and (iii) decision support tools. Our study also indicates that the new assessment approach can be used as a template to assess the current state of sustainability integration in company decision systems. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: In this paper, we present a method for sustainable product development (MSPD) with the aim of integrating social and ecological aspects of sustainability with a strategic business perspective in product development. The method applies backcasting from basic principles for sustainability, which allows a strategic approach, and it includes a modular system of guiding questions that are derived by considering these principles and the product life cycle. Initial testing in Swedish companies indicates that the suggested MSPD promotes a ‘bird''s eye’ perspective and encourages and aids development of products that support society''s transformation towards sustainability. Furthermore, it is concluded that the modular system provides flexibility and user-friendliness. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Electric vehicles seem to offer a great potential for sustainable transport development. The Swedish pioneer project GreenCharge Southeast is designed as a cooperative action research approach that aims to explore a roadmap for a fossil-free transport system by 2030 with a focus on electric vehicles. In the first paper of this tandem publication, the authors propose a new generic process model embedding the Framework of Strategic Sustainable Development. The purpose of applying it in an action-research mode as described in this paper was twofold: (i) to develop a vision for sustainable regional transport and a coarse roadmap towards that vision, and, while doing so, (ii) get additional empirical experiences to inform the development of the new generic process model. Experts from many sectors and organizations involved in the GreenCharge project provided vital information and reviewed all planning perspectives presented in Paper 1 in two sequential multi-stakeholder seminars. The results include a sustainable vision for electric vehicle systems in southeast Sweden within a sustainable regional transport system within a sustainable global society, as well as an initial development plan towards such a vision for the transport sector. The vision is framed by the universal sustainability principles, and the development plan is informed by the strategic guidelines, of the above-mentioned framework. Among other things, the vision and plan imply a shift to renewable energy and a more optimized use of areas and thus a new type of spatial planning. For example, the vision and plan implies a lower built-in demand for transport, more integrated traffic modes, and more multi-functional use of areas for energy and transport infrastructures, for example. Some inherent benefits of electric vehicles are highlighted in the vision and plan, including near-zero local emissions and flexibility as regards primary energy sources. The vision and plan also imply improved governance for more effective cross-sector collaboration to ensure coordinated development within the transport sector and between the transportation sector and other relevant sectors. Meanwhile, the new generic process model was refined and is ready to be applied and further tested in the GreenCharge project and in other projects within the transport sector as well as other sectors. The study confirmed that the new generic process model suggested in support of sustainable transport system and community development is helpful for giving diverse stakeholders, with various specialties and perspectives, a way of working that is goal-oriented and builds on effective, iterative learning loops and co-creation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]