Triple Bottom Line

      According to Slaper and Hall, the triple bottom line is an assessment method that is based on three criteria: environmental, economic, and social factors. The benefit of the TBL (triple bottom line) method of assessment is that companies will make decisions that allow for a sustainable future that will benefit both society and themselves. Companies will not only be considering economic benefits, but also benefits to the environment and society before making a business decision. The difficulty with the TBL is that there is no set measurement for relating economic, environmental, and social benefit as measurements different based on the project at hand or the organizations goals. Business companies that use the TBL assessment will based their criteria more on factors relating to money such as taxes, welfare, career retention, sales, and emissions while non-profit organizations may have a greater focus on sustainability issues such as protecting the environment or providing social services. Overall, TBL allows organizations to make decisions on the basis of building a sustainable future for society.

The role of the professional engineer and scientist in sustainable development

The term, Honest Broker, is used to describe an expert engaged in a new type of decision making. Mitchell, Carew and Clift describe an Honest Broker as one who offers a range of technical options to the stakeholder, allowing other specialist to engage in a decision making process that will address eco-centric, techno-centric, and socio-centric concerns. This allows for consultation between professionals and stakeholders.  This differs greatly from the traditional technology advocate as the goal is no longer for the expert to make all the decisions and inform stakeholders on the process. Instead, the Honest Broker offers a technological opinion on a wide variety of technical options. The Honest Broker does not take make a decision as opposed to the technology advocate that makes a decision based on techno-centric concerns. 

Sustainable Abundance or Ecological Crisis?

In “Sustainable Abundance, or Ecological Crisis” (Technology Matters, 2006) by Nye, he explains the positive and negative impacts society had on society in terms of “technological optimism” and “technological pessimism”.

“Technological optimism” is described as technology’s positive impact on shaping society and bringing higher levels of comfort to humans. Four main stages were described in the article: “hunting and gathering, agriculture, industrial steam-power, and the atomic age”. The invention of the steam engine caused mass industrialization, leading to mechanisation of several jobs, namely farming. This further catalyzed the development of new technologies as fewer people were required to live farming lifestyles and more people were encouraged to work in cities. People were encouraged with the promise of fewer work days and earlier retirement. The current population is much greater than before and the living standards have also greatly increased due to technology.

“Technological pessimism” describes the negative side effects that technology has brought, namely damage to the environment and a possession-based lifestyle. Due to the development of technology, forests have been deforested, oceans have been polluted, soil has been eroded, and air has been intoxicated through fossil fuels. Climate change is upon us and the society’s mindset has become based on acquiring new possessions. A study conducted  has shown that people in the 1990s were no more happy than they had been in 1957 although they had more possessions and a more advanced lifestyle; work hours were greater in 1990s and the hours with friends had decreased leading largely due to a materialistic lifestyle.

I myself am a “technological optimist”. New technology has shaped society into what it is today and compared to previous generations, I believe the benefits on society outweigh the losses. Technological fixes can be used to solve several environment issues, but imminently cause other problems to arise. This is an endless cycle that is inevitable. There is no way to take technology away from society as it is already deeply ingrained in our lives; the only option is to continue development of fixes and attempt to slow down destruction to the environment around us through sustainable practices.

Changing Business Cultures from Within

In “Changing Business Cultures from Within”, Anderson, Amodeo and Hartzfield described the stages of change that a company must undergo in order to change the outcomes of their actions. Businesses are slowly changing their paradigms due to the increasing demand for sustainability in society. According to Anderson et al., a shift towards a more sustainable attitude requires five stages of change: awakening, cocooning, metamorphosis, emergence, and engagement. In the awakening stage, a company must be open to new opinions and opportunities to change and create a new vision for the future. Then in the cocooning stage, the company engages in activities that would benefit the vision and develop an action plan. Once the company recognizes the course of action, they will enter the metamorphosis stage where the new sustainable vision is ingrained into every part of the company’s actions. This process includes teaching employees about the new view and putting the words into action. The final stage is influencing others where the company continually engages other companies and searches for new answers for further development of their sustainable goal.

For a sustainable future, businesses must focus on ecosystems and society in addition to profit. Currently, society is pressuring companies to acquire a sustainable mindset. People prefer to purchase merchandise from a company that has an initiative to be sustainable as they feel they are funding a good cause. This in turn, can be profitable for marketing and would create a positive feedback loop that could potentially cause more companies to undergo positive change.

Can Social Engineering Be Replaced by Technology?

Weinberg proposes that a “technological fix” is both beneficial in the short-term and practical because it does not require the changing of social norms. Implementation of a technological solution is much simpler than providing a social solution. Although technology brings about solutions to several social problems, a long-term, more permanent, fix would require the social engineer to create social change. The audio slide show describes “casual carpooling” as a solution to the social problem of road congestion. The proposed idea of a carpooling system based off of mutual understanding is a solution that does not require technology, rather a change in thinking. Drivers that participate are driven by the incentive of access to lower occupancy roads while passengers are motivated by their necessity to get somewhere. This mutual symbiosis that requires both parties to trust each other is a social solution, does not require new technology and benefits both individuals and the environment.

Beyond Engineering: How Society Shapes Technology

In Beyond Engineering: How Society Shapes Technology, Pool proposes that society is shaped by technology as in some nations, technology thrives while in others, it is a detriment. An example that Pool provides is the success of the nuclear reactor in France, but the failure of implementation of the same technology in the US. Another prime example of society shaping technology is the extinction of the production of steam engine cars due to the high price and a cheaper alternative, the gasoline car. Pool also states that the uncertainty due to the complexity of modern technology is a contributing factor in failures as society is unable to accurately predict the outcomes that may result. I agree with Pool as a large portion of society is unable to comprehend the complex nature of modern technology and that only small subset of specialists understand and share complex ideas. With that said, even without a full understanding, society still greatly influences technology. Everyone has their own opinion on technology as the effects on society are clearly visible in our everyday lives. As a result people tend towards innovations that allow for short term benefit as the long term results are only obvious to the specialists. Educating society about the impacts of technology would be pivotal in moving towards a society that shapes technology in a sustainable manner.

A Call to Engagement

A Call to Engagement

In Prugh and Renner’s State of the World 2014: Governing for Sustainability, governments were criticized for their indecisiveness and inaction while citizens were encouraged to engage in activities such as protests that would require the positive response towards sustainability from those with political power. They explain that business corporations operate for their own benefit; in order for change to occur, citizens must influence the government to create new policies that would make sustainable actions a requirement. Four different scopes in ideals that would lead to sustainable development are proposed: personal, local, national, and international. For sustainable future, one must first consider their own actions and impacts on the environment and try to leave as small as an impact as possible. Secondly, individuals must unite in communities to develop organizations that would push this initiative forward. Thirdly, the government must take reasonable action in negotiating at a national level minimize internal causes to damaging the environment. Lastly, the requirement for international cooperation is emphasized; they have also proposed the idea that having a more even distribution of genders in the government would be beneficial in developing and sustaining new views. Because we live in a democracy, progress must be dictated by the people. For any action to occur, the citizens must step up and create a demand for sustainability.