| At PB’s November 2003 Technical Exchange Program, I gave
a short presentation on sustainable development definitions1. But
what do these definitions really mean in the context of our professional
lives and the work that we do? This article is designed to answer
these questions for those who did not attend the seminar and to
supplement my presentation for those who did.
The Brundtland Definition
Virtually all organisations reference what has become known as
the Brundtland definition when articulating their understanding
of sustainable development. Dr Gro Harlem Brundtland was a Norwegian
politician who, in 1983, was asked by the Secretary General of the
United Nations to establish and chair the World Commission on Environment
and Development. The commission formulated the broad political concept
of sustainable development and published its report, “Our
Common Future,” in April 1987. This report alerted the world
to the urgency of making progress toward economic development that
could be sustained without depleting natural resources or harming
the environment. It defined sustainable development as “development
that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability
of future generations to meet their own needs.”
The Triple Bottom Line
The commission’s report highlighted three fundamental components
to sustainable development: environmental protection, economic growth
and social equity. These led to the concept of the triple bottom
line espoused by John Elkington, one of the world’s leading
authorities on sustainable development2.
The triple bottom line concept requires a balanced approach to
economic development, environmental protection and social well being—EES
for short. A number of organisations have changed this to profit,
planet and people, or the three Ps. BP, the global energy company,
went one further and changed profit to prosperity. Regardless of
the terms used, the triple bottom line is increasingly being adopted
as an effective approach in the management of businesses and can
be applied to any development scenario—a project, building
a business, change management, education…the list is endless.
Our Approach to Projects
The biggest impact of the triple bottom line concept is on how
we engineers, planners, designers and managers continue to deliver
a best practice solution to our clients. Providing we can accept
the premise that striving towards sustainable development equates
to a best practice approach, how can we practice this effectively
within PB?
It helps, I believe, to compare how we approach projects today
with how the engineering profession approached projects 30 years
ago. Today, environmental concerns have become more structured and
engineering solutions are designed to be more in tune with mitigating
those concerns. We have a new industry of environmental consultants
and have added another dimension to the planning process with environmental
impact assessments being a prerequisite for major projects.
Over the next years—probably many fewer than 30—social
impacts are likely to follow a similar path and, indeed, in many
environmental impact assessments, socio-economic assessments are
already routinely included. Human impact assessments are now emerging
and the relationships between communities divided by poorly planned
development, crime rates and economic prosperity are now seen as
significant. Although environmental and some socio-economic requirements
are driven by legislation and/or regulation, reputation drivers
are coming to the fore increasingly when clients and consultants
see emerging best practice in one part of the world and want to
apply it to their projects “back home.”
When to apply emerging best practice can be difficult to judge
both from a client perspective and as a consultant. The issues of
cost and relevance can often be raised as reasonable objections
to taking a leading edge approach. The question of when sustainable
development should be applied comes down to the discussion between
us and our clients. We need to be able to articulate a best practice
approach consistent with the client’s objectives, budgets
and responsibilities. We must also be able to respond as a leading
authority on the application of sustainability credentials when
the client has determined that they would prefer to take a specific
position on sustainable development, as an increasing number of
clients are doing3.
Some of the work that PB is undertaking on New York City Transit’s
#7 line is testament to this. As well as requiring the development
of a sophisticated score card to measure the project’s sustainability,
the client actively encouraged consideration of sustainable design
principles ranging from water recycling to assessing the feasibility
of using geothermal energy.
A simple rule to apply is to look at a project from the triple
bottom line position and ask yourself some pretty simple questions:
- Economic. Do the costs represent best value from the perspective
of achieving the project objectives? Where could costs be cut
and where have we traded value just to keep costs down? Have environmental
factors been included in the valuation of assets and services?
- Environmental. How does the project interact with the natural
environment? What is the impact on natural resources of the project?
How much energy will be used in manufacturing the materials? Could
this be minimised by using recycled materials or renewable resources?
- Social. If you lived next door to the project site, what would
you wish to see given that the project is going to proceed anyway?
How could you make it more integrated into the community or more
shielded without disrupting the community’s collective values?
Will the health, diversity and values of the community be maintained
or enhanced for the benefit of future generations?
What Sustainable Development Means within PB
The concept of the triple bottom line is equally applicable to
measuring PB’s performance as a whole. This was recognised
by the publication of our policy on sustainable development in 2003.
A key sentence from the policy is “We embrace both the principles
of sustainable development—a more careful balancing of social,
environmental, and economic concerns—and its fundamental goal
of development that meets the needs of the present without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
The strategic goals that the new “One PB” has adopted
(Figure 1) certainly align themselves with a triple bottom line
approach and the balance that has to be struck between them. Subsequent
progress could include the publication of an annual sustainability
or corporate social responsibility report to accompany PB’s
Annual Report, additional offices being certified to ISO 14001 (the
environmental management standard), and raising the visability of
PB’s approach to health and safety. Conclusion
Not having the appropriate knowledge to be able to assess when
it is appropriate would relegate PB to a follower’s role.
On this basis, it is therefore preferable that PB staff have the
knowledge relating to sustainable development issues within their
practice area even though they may not necessarily practice it in
all their pursuits or projects.
It is also worth noting that some of the most sustainable work
undertaken by engineers was designed and constructed in the nineteenth
century. The provision of treated water supplies, sewerage and sewage
treatment and the first subway systems are three examples where
the quality of life and the environment was improved through these
feats of engineering.
|
