Making long-term economic growth more sustainable: evaluating the costs and benefits

Currently, traditional development issues such as economic stagnation, poverty, hunger, and illness as well as newer challenges like environmental degradation and globalisation demand attention. Sustainable development, including its economic, environmental and social elements, is a key goal of decisionmakers. Optimal economic growth has also been a crucial goal of both development theorists and practitioners. This paper examines the conditions under which optimal growth might be sustainable, by assessing the costs and benefits of growth. Key environmental and social aspects are considered. The Ecol-Opt-Growth-1 model analyses economic–ecological interactions, including resource depletion, pollution, irreversibility, other environmental effects, and uncertainty. It addresses some important issues, including savings, investment, technical progress, substitutability of productive factors, intergenerational efficiency, equity, and policies to make economic growth more sustainable—a basic element of the sustainomics framework. The empirical results support growing concerns that costs of growth may outweigh its benefits, resulting in unsustainability. Basically, in a wide range of circumstances, long term economic growth is unsustainable due to increasing environmental damage. Nevertheless, the model has many options that can be explored by policy makers, to make the development path more sustainable, as advocated by sustainomics. One example suggests that government supported abatement programs are needed to move towards sustainable development, since the model runs without abatement were infeasible. The optimal rate of abatement increases over time. Abatement of pollution is necessary to improve ecosystem viability and increase sustainability. Further research is necessary to seek conditions under which alternative economic growth paths are likely to become sustainable.

Use of indicators to assess the sustainability of housing developments in Australia

Most new housing in Australia is occurring on greenfield sites on the edges of the capital cities. These housing developments are often criticised for their social and environmental unsustainability. These unsustainable suburbs are a legacy for future generations. They will create dire social and environmental problems if a serious economic downturn was to occur or a resource shortage e.g. oil was to make accessibility impossible. Coupled to these threats is that of the social ‘undesirability’ of isolated suburbs where only those on low incomes made their home. Most of those on higher incomes seek established suburbs which have ‘character’, social amenities and ease of access. Typically, these are in older suburbs close to city centres. This paper describes a methodology that has been developed to analyse past and future housing developments. The results of the analysis can provide a guide to improving the sustainability of these suburbs. The methodology uses several criteria to reflect the fact that no single criterion is adequate to describe or analyse the sustainability of a housing development. Sustainability should embrace social and environmental perspectives, so a multi-criteria analysis is appropriate. The theoretical framework for this methodology has been described elsewhere. However, in this previous work only five criteria were considered: energy use, resource use, neighbourhood character, neighbourhood connectedness and social diversity. In each case, high and low sustainability practice has been identified so that ranking is possible. This paper initially summarizes the way in which these previous five criteria are assessed but then adds a sixth criterion (social connectedness) because of a perceived gap in the previous assessment. The results of an analysis of three suburbs reported in the previous work are updated. They score poorly in terms of social connectedness underlining the need to ‘repair’ these suburbs in order to improve their overall sustainability.