Create an annotated bibliography from the three core readings (provided); ? Each annotation (summary & comment) should be approximately 300 words (per reading); ? Each annotation should include a summary & comment paragraph: ? Summary paragraph: Summarise and paraphrase the key ideas and/or arguments in each reading (do not quote). ? Comment paragraph: What aspects of the readings relate to skills needed to be successful in your chosen workplace? ? Include a correct reference for each reading at the top of each annotation (as heading) using APA (or CDU Harvard for Business, Commerce & Accounting students). ? Each reading needs a correct reference as a heading, followed by your summary (1-2 paragraphs) and then your comment (1-2 paragraphs). ? Format your assessment according to the guidelines (found in Assessment Tasks on Learnline). The 3 core readings for CUC100 are available for free which you can download on the CUC100 Learnline site under "Readings". We will be scaffolding each of the readings in detail in Weeks 4, 5 and 6, so this will help you to produce your summaries for each of them. Your comments, which directly follow your summaries, should relate the key ideas from the readings to being successful in your chosen workplace. Weight

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969 Warning This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of The Charles Darwin University pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (the Act). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Do not remove this notice 1 What Is Sustainability? We live in a vast, three-dimensional, interconnected web of energy flows and life forms. Years ago our world appeared to be the size of whatever culture we lived within and felt as if it were stable and unchangeable. Our world is now understood to be planetary in scale, to be changing very fast, and to be situated either at the threshold of a planetary disaster of unprecedented tnagnitude or at the beginning of a sustainable new era. Whatever the outcome, the new state of the world will not be like it is today. Sustainability is about seeing and recognizing the dynamic, cyclical, and interdependent nature of all the parts and pieces of life on earth, from the soil under our feet to the whole planet we call home, from the interactions of humans with their habitats and each other to the invisible chemical cycles that have been redistributing water, oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen for millions of years. Sustainability is also about becoming educated and involved citizens of this living, changing world and determining what most needs to be done and which part each of us will take on in our individual comer ofthe world. It is about taking action with wartime speed because time is running out, restoring what is broken and finding fresh approaches that are truly regenerative. It is about the emergence of a new dynamic state of the world in which there is room for everyone, in which every living being can pursue its right to live and to thrive, in which the great systems and cycles of the planet once again find their o\\vn state of durable yet dynamic equilibrium in patterns, from microscopic to local to global, that will endure over long periods oftime. We will use the word "sustainability" in two ways in this book: as an idea and as a professional discipline. "Sustainability" as an idea refers to the body of knowledge that deals with how dynamic systems work on this planet we call home, including what we know about the current health or decline of those systems. "Sustainability" as a discipline refers to humanity's rapidly-evolving response to the urgent planetary challenges we all face, a response that includes emerging professional opportunities. What Is Sustainability? You are probably already familiar with some of the strategies employed in sustainability efforts: solar panels, recycling, or harvesting rainwater, for example. These are important positive steps. We will study them and many others in more detail later in the book, but by themselves they cannot make the current conditions sustainable. So, what is sustainability? Definitions At its core, the word "sustainability" refers to systems and processes that are able to operate and persist on their own over lpng periods of time. The German equivalent, Nachhaltigkeit, 4 Context first appeared in the 1713 forestry book Sylvicu/tura Oeconomica (Warde 2011, 153). If you look up the adjective "sustainable" in a standard dictionary, you will find definitions such as these: "able to continue without interruption or diminution," "able to endure without failing," and "capable of continuing for a long time." 1 The noun "sustainability" first appeared in English around 1972 and is typically used in connection with systems that support life on earth. The Oxford English Dictionary defines the ecological meaning of"sustainability" this way: "Of, relating to, or designating forms of human economic activity and culture that do not lead to environmental degradation, especially avoiding the long-term depletion of natural resources" (Simpson and Weiner 2009). Systems The concept of systems is fundamental to sustainability. A system is a coherently organized set of interconnected elements (Meadows 2008, 188). A property of every system is that its identity is always more than the sum of its parts. The Earth itself is a system, made of many other nested and interrelated systems; the biophysical world is an intricate and multi-layered web, a complex, three-dimensional network of interconnected systems. Go for a walk in a hemlock-fir forest, for example, and you will be surrounded by trees. Each tree is an individual, linked inextricably to the systems around it. The tree is also a community, with thousands of residents making their living within webs of interactions that link them to their particular tree and to each other. Each member of each community has their own job to do, their favorite place to live, and their own finely-tuned specialty. Each one takes in their own kind of food and puts out products (sometimes called "wastes") that are food for someone else. As you walk, there are literally billions of creatures in the soil beneath each footstep, all connected through the links of an ecosystem to each other and to the soil particles and roots that make up their world. Each tree, meanwhile, is part of a forest-a community of trees, soil, water, and atmosphere. The forest, long-lasting yet constantly changing, is part of a web of interactions that connects it across miles to great planet-scale cycles and across thousands of years to the forests that came before and those that will come after. Common Characteristics ofSystems Why have these living systems persisted for so long? The Earth is a richly detailed tapestry of quite different environments, including deserts, prairies, forests, rivers, oceans, deep soil, and atmosphere. Yet no matter which piece you study, you will see common patterns connecting them all. You will notice that there isn't any waste. Energy and materials go round and round in closed loops for millions of years, with the byproducts from one creature or system becoming inputs or food for another. You will notice that at whatever scale you examine, you find rich networks of connections and interconnections and interdependence, with systems both depending upon each other and affecting each other. You will not see any monocultures or strict uniformity; instead, you will see mosaics of almost infinite diversity, with particular variations finely tuned to the very localized places where they live, where every organism has a niche and a particular role to play (American Geological Institute 2011, 28). You will also notice that materials and processes do not stay put. Energy is constantly exchanged, chemicals are constantly exchanged, and the grand whole is in a state of dynamic equilibrium. What Is Sustainability? 5 Natural Capital These living systems are finite, and being sustainable means not using them up beyond their capacity to regenerate. This is analogous to living off the interest in a savings account and not spending the capital. We have the planetary equivalent of a savings account, but it is made of plants, animals, soil, water, and air, sometimes known as "natural capital" (Hawken et al. 2008). Being "green," or environmentally responsible, is not the same thing as being "sustainable." Greenness is a positive step, but not the ultimate goal. While actions such as recycling and using less-toxic products are important, focusing only on being "less bad" by depleting irreplaceable capital more slowly or by poisoning ourselves more gradually is still not sustainable (McDonough and Braungart 2002, 51-67). Neither is a rigid focus on putting natural systems back to where they were at some earlier time in human history. Fostering systems that can persist through long periods of time will require that we direct our intentions and energy toward regeneration within living, dynamic systems. Sustainability is the ability to adapt to change. Triple Bottom Line or the Three Pillars ofSustainability An idea you will hear often in discussions of sustainability is one that is sometimes called the "triple bottom line" (TBL) or the "three E's," sometimes also referred to as the three pillars ofsustainability or as planet, people, profit (Elkington 2012, 55). Remember the dictionary definition: "sustainability" relates to "forms of human economic activity and culture that do not lead to environmental degradation," a definition that includes the "Three E's," where the letter E can stand for environment, economics, and equity. In recent decades, scientists and plaWiers began to realize that we as a planet have many problems that are connected, including poverty, health, overpopulation, resource depletion, food and water scarcity, political instability, and the destruction of the life support systems we all depend on. We cannot fix one problem in isolation because they are all connected. The triple bottom line of-sustainability recognizes the need to foster communities that are healthy, safe, and secure, with economic opportunity for everyone while keeping Earth's life support system in good shape (Cortese 2012, x). The first E represents environment (or ecology), and it refers to preserving and restoring the health of living systems. All life on the planet depends on ecosystems to purify air and water, pollinate crops, provide food, recycle waste, and to circulate atmospheric gases, chemical elements, and energy; these processes are sometimes referred to as ecosystem services (Costanza et al. 1997). In order to create a planetary condition that is sustainable we must understand how these processes work, not just as individual pieces but as systems. We must see our own species as neither victims nor masters but as active members of the interconnected webs of all living beings. We need to learn to live within our means ecologically, to recognize that there are built-in limits to any system known as its carrying capacity (Pulliam and Haddad 1994; Wackemagel and Rees 1995, 48-49). Ecological integrity is critical, but is not the only requirement if the goal is a planet that is sustainable. Our environmental problems are a consequence of the ways we have organized ourselves socially, politically, and economically. The second "E" represents economics. In order for systems to continue over the long term, resources must be distributed fairly, with each individual able to meet their own basic human needs. Unlimited economic growth is not sustainable, although increasing the quality oflife 6 Context is (Daly and Farley 2003, 12). Economic growth that uses up natural resources, pollutes the soil, air, and water, and depletes ecosystem services will eventually lead to a decline in quality oflife. People need economic motivation to change. No person willingly chooses poverty if they know that other people are living comfortably and easily, and most people will not change just because it will benefit someone else. If, on the one hand, you are living in a rainforest in Brazil and struggling to feed your family, for example, and you suspect that if things go on as they are your children will starve but that if you cut down your trees and plant soybeans you will get money for those soybeans, what will you choose? You will choose to cut down the trees. If you and your children are hungry, you will probably not stop to think about longterm results. If, on the other hand, there were a system where by retaining the trees and by keeping the water in the nearby river clean you could feed your children, you would probably do that instead. That is the kind of world we must aim for, one that can deliver long-term prosperity to everyone, where people in every region from rainforest to grassland to inner city live well (Meadows et al. 2004, 41 ). It is possible. The third "E" represents equity, that is, social equity or equality (Edwards 2005, 23). Equity includes freedom from unhealthy living conditions and equal access to food, water, employment, education, and healthcare. Equity means providing opportunities for all people, not just a privileged few, to grow and flourish in their own way. Equity also includes intergenerational concern: acknowledging the impact our decisions today will have on future generations. Some writers refer to these future people we have not met yet as "our neighbors in time." In fact, one of the most often-quoted definitions of sustainable development from the 1987 United Nations report Our Common Future says that it is "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (WCED 1987, 8). Throughout this text we will think about fairness to and the impact of our actions on other species. Social equity as the third "E," however, focuses especially on fairness to members of our own human species. Challenges and Responses When sustainability scientists take measure of the current state of the planet, they find that it is not good. In fact, a variety of indicators all point to the same conclusion: the situation is critical and getting worse. Our planet has seen five previous mass extinctions in its" 4.5 billion-year history. We have now entered the sixth great extinction (Primack 2008, 125) and are seeing species disappear at a quickening rate, with a quarter of all mammals and a third of all amphibians facing extinction within the next 30 years and 50 percent of all remaining species under threat (IUCN 2007). There is no guarantee that our own species will not be one of those facing extinction. Our population has expanded beyond the home planet's carrying capacity, food scarcity and political instability are the reality in many regions, and increasingly severe water shortages looming in the near future promise to make peaee and stability even less likely. Overwhelming it all is the prospect of the Earth system teetering at a planetary tipping point, with climate change now a certainty and runaway temperature changes a clear possibility that could bring about the extinction of the majority of species. The situation is dire, and we appear to be nearly out of time. Yet, there is hope. In fact, that is what sustainability is about. We might be on the brink of disaster, but we may also be on the threshold of an unprecedented and regenerative era. You are poised to be a constructive part of that new era. Yes, there is much we humans do not know, but we know enough to understand the root causes of the situation we are in and if we What Is Sustainability? 7 understand the causes, we probably know enough to understand what we need to change in order to tum the situation around. Each problem by itself is serious; taken together, they add up to signs of a planet in crisis. The crisis is cumulative, but the solutions may be cumulative as well. As in all living systems, particular individual contributions add up to a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. Each of us has pieces of solutions that we apply in our particular part of the world and taken together, these pieces are beginning to assemble into a potential picture of a new and sustainable world. We have enough knowledge and we have enough skills. We just need to bring them together-concentrated instead of diluted, focused instead of aimless, integrated instead of disconnected. Looking around, we see proof that almost all the components we need to shape the new world already exist somewhere in the world. In examples from around the globe, we can begin to see the outlines. One conclusion they illustrate is that change does not have to mean unpleasant sacrifice. Change can mean new business opportunities and living wages, better quality oflife, and surroundings that are comfortable and delightful. Sustai~ability as a Discipline How do we know what is sustainable? Do we just collect opinions and listen to the opinion with the most proponents? No, we do not, if we want a legitimate field of study. Sustainability is a concept that is built upon science as its foundation. In fact, one academic field of study is known as sustainability science (Clark 2007, 1737). Science is a field ofknowledge that studies physical phenomena in a systematic way and collects observable and measurable evidence using methods that are reproducible. Because the results are reproducible, some outcomes can be predicted. The things we currently know about what is and is not sustainable are based upon observable evidence. How that evidence is understood may take on different dimensions when examined by different disciplines. For example, the issue of human population growth may appear differently when seen through the lens of biology (habitat destruction), geology (aquifer depletion), social science (education and family planning), or political science (social instability). What is a discipline, and can we call "sustainability" a discipline? While the content of each discipline is unique and different from every other discipline, all recognized disciplines have certain characteristics in common (Komiyama et al. 2011, 27). An academic discipline exhibits some form of consensus; it has coherence as a single field of study. Each discipline has a specialized vocabulary. Practitioners in a discipline receive similar educations and absorb the same professional literature. The discipline has a community of scholars, people who do research or teaching. It has some kind of communications network, including professional organizations and peer-reviewed academic journals. Knowledge is collected and interpreted in particular ways defined by each discipline. Discoveries in biology, for example, are found and verified in different ways from those in archaeology. There are criteria for defining what constitutes new knowledge. Some newer fields are considered interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary. That is, they cross traditional boundaries and bring together knowledge from more than one academic discipline, leading to new methods for understanding a subject (Orr 1992, 90). Sustainability is destined to become one such field. Although the concepts that underlie sustainability have become well-established, "sustainability" as an academic field is very new and still forming. While myriad professional journals and societies explore a range of issues that affect sustainability, there is as yet no single academic or professional society for sustainability, no single official publication that speaks for the profession. 8 Context The challenge facing the fonnation of sustainability as a discipline is its interdisciplinary nature (ibid., 84). In any one of the sciences it is clear what is within the field of study and what is not. Sustainability, however, concerns the survival of the entire planet and its inhabitants as a whole, and that means many areas of study are relevant. Practitioners must be able to understand a range offacts accurately. They must be able to look carefully and deeply at scientific, technical, social, political, and economic details. At the same time they must be able to look at overarching frameworks realistically and be able to understand how details fit into larger systems at a planetary scale. What should a serious student of sustainability do? A mental toolbox of high-quality thinking skills is essential equipment (Stibbe 2009, 21 0). She or he must work at getting the broadest education they can manage. A person who wants to contribute meaningfully to a sustainable planet will need well-developed critical thinking skills, with the ability to follow logical patterns of thought, to evaluate sources critically, and to separate fact from opinion. Anned with knowledge and clear thinking, the sustainability practitioner will then need the ability to encourage, to motivate, to inspire. None of us can do it alone. The situation of our planet is dire. It is also still a situation with hope and potential. Welcome to the changing and sustainable world ahead. Further Reading Brown, Lester R. Plan B 4.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2009. Cunningham, William P. and Mary Ann Cunningham. Environmental Science: A Global Concern. 11th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2009. Edwards, Andres R. Thriving Beyond Sustainability: Pathways to a Resilient Society. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 2010. Heinberg, Richard and Daniel Lerch, eds. The Post Carbon Reader: Managing the 21st Century's Sustainability Crises. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2010. Meadows, Donella, Jorgen Randers, and Dennis Meadows. Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green, 2004. Stibbe, Arran, ed. The Handbook ofSustainability Literacy: Skills for a Changing World. Cambridge: Green Books, 2009. Critical Thinking and Discussion 1 2 3 4 5 An elevator speech is a concise summary that can be conveyed within the span of a 30second elevator trip. If a neighbor learned you were studying sustainability and asked, "So, what is sustainability?" what would you say? Write an "elevator speech" to explain the basic concepts of sustainability. Think about a sustainability issue the planet faces, one with which you are familiar. Does the knowledge needed for finding solutions come from one academic discipline, or more than one? List the disciplines you think might be involved in addressing this issue. Our species has had an extraordinary impact on the biosphere. Why do you think that is? Modem society is experiencing rapid innovation and change. Do you think the rate of change is a sign ofunsustainability or progress? Is there a simple answer? Do you think that laws and regulations are necessary in order to move society toward a sustainable future? What Is Sustainability? 6 7 8 9 9 Two common diagrams for representing sustainability use simple circles. The triple bottom line of sustainability is traditionally illustrated by three intersecting circles representing environment, economics, and social equity. Some scholars prefer to illustrate the triple bottom line of sustainability by placing the economic and social spheres within the circle representing environment. What messages does each version convey? What do they say about the relationships between ecology, economics, and equity? Once you have answered, can you think of a different possible message each version could represent? People sometimes feel overwhelmed by the magnitude of the problems our planet faces. If you were working on a sustainability project and someone told you, "There is no point in trying to be sustainable, since it is hopeless anyway," how would you respond? Are the terms "sustainability" and "sustainable development" interchangeable? If not, how do they differ? Imagine a community of bacteria living on a Petri dish. A single bacterium was placed on the dish at midnight. Their population doubled once an hour. At 1:00 a.m. there were 2 bacteria, by 2:00a.m. there were 4 bacteria, and so forth. At noon, 12 hours later, their food supply ran out. At what time of day was half their food used up? The Journal of Environmental Education, 2002, Vol. 34, No. 1, 16-20 Developing Awareness of the Sustainability Concept IRENE M. HERREMANS and ROBIN E. REID ABSTRACT: In this article, we discuss the use of the sustainability triad as a framework for teaching sustainability in the classroom. We use a short case study of a national park to show how the triad can be used to determine if its three dimensions (economic, social, and environmental) are congruent or in conflict with each other. The tool is helpful in understanding sustainability in a concrete rather than abstract form. Key words: applied learning, case analysis, sustainability triad, teaching tool A 1990). All academic institutions have been challenged by university and sustainability leaders to sign and implement these declarations. Disappointed with the universities' progress, the Swansea Declaration implored universities to contribute to \"major attitudinal and policy changes for a sustainable future\" (The Swansea Declaration, 1993). These declarationsalong with the Tbilisi Conference goalsclearly state that academic institutions need to take action. However, in a recent assessment of environmental progress at North American universities, Herremans and Allwright (1999) discovered that very few universities are even aware of these declarations, let alone carrying out their responsibilities regarding EE in the classroom. If, as academics, we propose to educate students to make decisions that will reflect an understanding of environmental stewardship and sustainability, then seats of learning must be actively involved in creating models and processes that can be used to bridge the gap between the real world and the classroom. We discuss the sustainability triad (Sadler 1988; 1990) as a classroom tool to assess the results of stakeholder processes and management strategies that affect land and resource use in Canadian national parks. To show how the sustainability triad can be used for analysis, we have included a minicase (Waterton Lakes National Park and area) as a real-life example of how multistakeholder ll educators have a responsibility to provide students with opportunities to become good environmental citizens, not only as consumers but also as providers of environmentally responsible goods and services. In this article, we discuss a method that can be used in the classroom to help students more fully understand, recognize, and implement the concept of sustainability. The groundwork for environmental education (EE) was laid as early as the 1970s, when the Tbilisi Conference (UNESCO, 1977) set forth goals for providing students with opportunities to develop new behavior patterns regarding sustainable living. By the 1990s, academic communities had put forth the Talloires Declaration (1990) and the Halifax Declaration (1991) to address the need for educational programs that would produce environmentally literate and responsible university graduates (The Talloires Declaration, Irene M. Herremans is an associate professor in the Haskayne School of Business and an adjunct professor in the Faculty of Environmental Design at the University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Robin E. Reid is an instructor in the School of Tourism at the University College of the Cariboo in Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada. 16 Herremans & Reid values can be pivotal in whether resources are managed sustainably. The triad provides students with a concrete process for identifying practices that are not sustainable and determining why they are not sustainable. The next step is to move stakeholders from an unsustainable position to a more sustainable one; this step is perhaps the most challenging in that it is based on human perceptions and values. The Waterton Minicase The minicase presented in this article incorporates two of the three approaches suggested by the Schools Council in its Project Environment (1974) (see Appendix). The council suggested that EE should teach about, for, and from the environment. Students should learn about various environmental issues through investigation and discovery. They should also develop attitudes and values that encourage an informed concern that leads to a personal environmental ethic. Although the council suggested that students should learn investigation and communication skills by using the environment as a source of activities and a medium for inquiry and discovery, the teaching approach does not attempt to include this last approach. However, projects and experiential exercises designed to learn from the environment can easily evolve from a foundation developed through a knowledge base designed to teach about and for the environment. What is new about this approach to EE in the classroom is thatonce students have the tools and understanding of the sustainability triadthey can apply it to any situation. The triad is flexible and can be applied to a local resort, hotel, national park, new development project, or existing business. Sources of information about activities can come from a variety of learning sources (i.e., students' personal experiences, news articles, development proposals, and guest speakers). Using the sustainability triad as a framework for case analysis offers several pedagogical advantages: 1. Students can more easily conceptualize the links among the three dimensions of sustainability and begin to understand the dimensions more thoroughly by defining activities that fit into each of the areas of overlap (education about the environment). 2. The framework is an aid to understanding that barriers to achieving sustainability frequently stem from a diversity of stakeholder value sets (education for the environment). 3. Use of the framework helps to develop higher learning levels such as judgment, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation (useful in both education about and for the environment). Even though declarations have been designed by university leaders to guide the direction and responsibilities of academic communities, the process of implementation is not as clear. It becomes difficult to move from a set of broad-based general principles to course content covered in the classroom on a day-to-day basis. Evidence of this difficulty lies in the fact that the quality of EE has been criticized as having poor definitions, unclear directions and purposes, and inappropriate, inaccurate, or biased content (McClaren, 1997). To improve the quality of EE, we must take action in many directions. In this article, we focus our discussion on how educators can improve environmental curriculum in two ways. They can: 1. Develop content that springs from our knowledge of what variables are most influential in motivating individuals to be responsible environmental citizens; and 2. Integrate environmental content in every school program as either a separate course, as part of existing course content, or both. FIGURE 1. The Sustainability Triad. Economic Values 17 Social Values Environmental Values The sustainability domain is the area in which an organization can operate and still maintain a consistent and suitable harmony among the three main dimensions. The term sustainability is abstract; it means capable of being maintained over the long term. Its derivative, sustain, means \"to keep in existence; keep going; to carry the weight or burden of; to bear up against\" (Webster's Unabridged, 1983, p. 1838). The concept of sustainability is often depicted in Western culture by three overlapping circles representing the social, economic, and environmental dimensions (see Sadler, 1988, 1990). Both Hodge (1997) and Fien and Trainer (1993) have elaborated on Sadler's original concept of sustainability. For example, an activity, process, region, or project is deemed sustainable if it maintains, supports, or carries the weight or burden of all three dimensions over the long term (see Figure 1). The economic dimension represents a system of producing, distributing, and consuming wealth, which is generally defined as the means of satisfying the material needs of people through money, property, possessions of monetary goods, or anything having economic value measurable in price. 18 The Journal of Environmental Education The social dimension represents a system of living or associating in groups or communities and considers the importance of maintaining and improving human living standards. It considers the continued satisfaction of basic human needs as well as higher-level social and cultural necessities (Brown et al., 1987, p. 716). The social dimension does not define wealth in terms of material possessions that can be bought, sold, or stocked for the future, but it suggests fair treatment regardless of gender and racial equality, a basic level of health care, safety standards at work, food standards, exposure to the arts and humanities, recreational opportunities, happy personal life, lack of human exploitation, and more. The social dimension shifts the emphasis from individual rights and economic wealth to community rights and social welfare of all human beings. The environmental dimension represents a system of providing integrity and preservation of ecosystems (Sadler, 1988, 1990) and is concerned with the continued productivity and functioning of ecosystems (Brown et al., 1987, p. 716). An environmental perspective represents a scientifically oriented outlook toward sustaining the biological and ecological conditions that make development possible (Shearman, 1990). However, the environmental dimension also recognizes that flora and fauna might have value outside their abilities to satisfy the social and economic needs of individuals and societies. This environmental dimension has two characteristics that make it similar to the social dimension. First, it does not define wealth in terms of possessions that are valued only in the marketplace; the difficulty of determining the cost and benefits of initiatives designed to save the environment as efforts (costs) and accomplishments (benefits) cannot be quantified. Second, the value of the benefits is based on the value sets of a diverse group of stakeholders that place different values on various elements of the environment. Therefore, the benefits derived from strong and healthy ecosystems are defined in terms of each individual's enhanced personal welfare. Through their meta-analysis of environmental behavioral research, Hines et al. (1986/1987, p. 3) found that individuals who have knowledge about environmental issues or knowledge about how to take action on those issues are more likely to engage in environmentally responsible behavior. The teaching tool builds on the knowledge of what may influence responsible environmental behavior. The minicase and analysis in the Appendix illustrate the use of this tool. Discussion of Analysis: Congruency or Conflict? 1. The change in mandate for the park versus the traditional use of the park (environmental-social conflict). The park's main thrust is to maintain its ecological integrity; however, the ranchers and other visitors often have a priority for social interests. Ranchers historically used the park as a source for recreation: the dance hall and swimming pool. These different stakeholder philosophies of the prima- ry purpose for the park create a conflict between the environmental and social dimensions of the triad. 2. Wolf program (attempt at social-environmental-economic congruency). In an effort to bring the economic and environmental dimensions closer together, a compensation program was introduced by Southwest Alberta Livestock Compensation Program to address the economic interests of the ranchers for their loss of livestock. Despite the efforts, the wolf population continued to decrease. The consequence suggests that the social perspectivesupported by a strong negative cultural attitude toward wolvescaused the sustainability effort to fail. 3. Municipal districts versus Biosphere Reserve (economic-environmental conflict). Increased pressure has been placed on the lands surrounding national parks because of increases in per capita income and the desire to escape from urbanization, creating additional demand for vacation homes. These different stakeholder philosophies represent a conflict between the economic interests of the municipal districts and the environmental interests of the park. 4. Ranchers versus municipal district (economic-social conflict). Ranchers do not want agricultural lands to be subdivided for vacation homes and other tourist interests, but municipal districts want to increase the tax base and encourage short-term employment. These stakeholder philosophies represent a conflict between the municipal districts' economic interests and the ranchers' social interests. 5. Aboriginal interpretation and tourist behavior (working toward environmental-social congruency). Involving local aboriginal communities in the interpretation of the landscape in the education of tourists in the park can assist in working toward tourism that is ecologically sustainable. Waterton is close to a large aboriginal population that traditionally used the area. In the social context of sustainability, aboriginal interpreters may use spiritual discussions to raise awareness of and appreciation for the ecological significance of the landscape. Aboriginal interpreters are also in a position to raise visitor awareness about the native culture and the historical ties to the area. 6. The park's new mandate and feeding of animals (economic-environmental-social conflict). Even though the park's mandate is to preserve its ecological integrity, most of management's efforts are spent on satisfying the social and recreational needs of the visitors rather than informing them about proper behavior toward wildlife and other ecological considerations. One mechanism to overlap the economic and environmental aspects of the situation is to fine visitors for disturbing wildlife; however, this effort has failed because there is no real means to enforce the penalty. Although all three dimensions are represented in this situation, the implementation procedure and the related behaviors of the parties involved cause the resulting unsustainability. Identifying the congruencies and conflicts among the three dimensions of social, environmental, and economic sets the stage for the next step: discussing how the situation Herremans & Reid can be improved. When discussing solutions, students' opinions will often differ about what actions the park should take in reaching the goal of sustainability. Some people might not agree that the conflicts discussed are really conflicts. To understand why disagreement in opinions exists, students must understand their own values by looking at three continuums and thinking about where they would place themselves and others on these continuums. Such diversity in basic human values makes it even more difficult to find a common ground for reaching a sustainable target as a society. These three continuums are (Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, 1961): (a) self-interest-community interest, (b) only humans have value-all life (flora and fauna) has value, and (c) short-term vision-long-term vision. The students will represent a range of values by placing the stakeholders somewhere along the continuum. Groups that believe strongly in individual rights and interests may have little regard for community rights or interests. Holding the belief that only humans have value would lead to strong support of interchangeability of resources and their related value; for example, the products produced from a tree have as much or more value than a tree standing in a forest. A short-term vision would believe that one generation has no responsibility to protect resources for future generations. Students can quickly become aware of why it is difficult to resolve environmental conflicts. The increased awareness of why conflicts occur can aid in the process of coming to a solution. Analyzing a situation from the point of view of the sustainability triad helps to unveil the underlying causes of unsustainability and to seek solutions (education about the environment). Furthermore, such an analysis highlights the necessity for a change in values if true sustainability is to be achieved and helps to explain the underlying reasons for consistency or conflict among the dimensions and what underlying values drive the result. Expanding the use of the sustainability triad in this manner provides education for the environment and will allow students to understand more fully their own personal environmental ethic. The concepts drawn out by the national park minicase can easily be transferred to a business, institute, project, or other activity that has been in the local or national news as a point of public controversy. Using an example with which students are familiar can help them relate to and better understand the nature of multidimensional decisions, not only as members of the business community but as members of society. 19 systems at North American universities: What drives good performance? International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 1(2), 168-181. Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tamara, A. N. (1986/1987). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1-8. Hodge, T. (1997). Toward a conceptual framework for assessing progress toward sustainability. Social Indicators Research, 40, 5-98. Kluckhohn, F. R., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in value orientations. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson, & Co. McClaren, M. (1997). Reflections on alternatives to national standards in environmental education: Process-based quality assessment. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 2, 36-43. Reid, R. E. (1996). An investigation of human values: Building a foundation for indicators of ecologically sustainable tourism. (Master's thesis, University of Calgary). Ottawa: National Library of Canada. Microform TJ-18698. Sadler, B. (1988). Impact assessment, development planning and international assistance in post Brundtland perspective. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Impact Assessment for International Development (International Association for Impact Assessment, Vancouver), pp. 775-787. Sadler, B. (1990). Sustainable development and water resources management. Alternatives, 3(17), 14-24. Schools Council. (1974). Project environment. Harlow: Longman. Shearman, R. (1990). The meaning and ethics of sustainability. Environmental Management, 14(1), 1-8. The Swansea Declaration. (1993, August). Association of Commonwealth Universities' Quinquennial Conference, University of Wales, Swansea, Wales. The Talloires Declaration. (1990, October). Retrieved July 31, 2002, from http://www.ulsf.org/programs_talloires_report.html UNESCO. (1977, October). Final report. Paper presented at the Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education, Tbilisi, Republic of Georgia, USSR. Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary: Deluxe Second Edition. (1983). New York: Simon & Schuster. APPENDIX Minicase for Analysis REFERENCES Waterton Lakes National Park is a small park in Western Canada that has been designated as a biosphere reserve through UNESCO's \"Man and the Biosphere\" program. This designation means that the park is a protected core with the landscape surrounding the park acting as a zone of cooperation in which human impacts are monitored. The unique combination of prairie and mountain landscapes generates a rich variety of flora and fauna. Therefore, wildlife is frequently seen in the town site within the park, where visitors sometimes are found feeding the wildlife. Park management finds itself engaged in a variety of activities (i.e., giving directions to campgrounds and picnic sites) with little time left to educate visitors about proper behavior with wildlife. Even though park employees can impose fines, usually the cost of the court process to enforce payment is often greater than the fine imposed. In addition to the visitors to the park, there are other stakeholders such as ranchers, surrounding municipal districts, aboriginal communities, and Parks Canada. Each stakeholder has a different point of view, which is listed below. Brown, L., Hanson, M. E., Liverman, D. M., & Merideth, Jr., R. W. (1987). Global sustainability: Toward definition. Environmental Management, 11(6), 713-719. Fien, J., & Ted, T. (1993). A Vision of Sustainability. In J. Fein (Ed.), Environmental education: A pathway to sustainability (pp. 24-42). Geelong, Victoria, Australia: Deakin University Press. The Halifax Declaration. (1991, December). Halifax Conference on University Action for Sustainable Development, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada. Herremans, I. M., & Allwright, D. (2000). Environmental management Ranchers: The park was set aside as the Kootenay Lakes Forest Park in 1895 at the request of a local resident. The intent was to protect the serene beauty of the area from encroaching settlements. For years, the lakes had been a common resort for camping and vacationing for the surrounding neighborhood. Many of the ranchers remember the many social activities that occurred such as a dance hall that provided great nightlife. The ranchers also remember when they could camp anywhere without restrictions. Some activities have been phased out, however, as the park's mandate has 20 The Journal of Environmental Education changed. Some ranchers see the area as their own playground; therefore, they are not open to regulations that restrict their activities in the park or on the surrounding lands. Consequently, many of the local ranchers do not understand or support the new biosphere reserve program. Municipal districts: When limitations for development inside the park occur, land-use pressures shift to the surrounding areas. The surrounding municipalities are likely to benefit from tourism growth; land areas that are subdivided for homes contribute to the tax base. Vacation homes create employment for builders, land speculators, and real estate agents but result in short-term economic gains. Local aboriginal communities: In the historical aboriginal view of the landscape, culture is integrated with nature at the level of ecosystems. Within this context, the aboriginal culture is structured by the intrinsic and spiritual values that connect the people to the land. This holistic view of interconnectedness between humans with all living things is fundamentally different from the traditional Western worldview of humans and nature that has dominated park-management strategies. Parks Canada: The mandate of all national parks in Canada was amended in 1988 to recognize and maintain ecological integrity and to protect intact ecosystems. In an attempt to fulfill this mandate, there has been increased recognition that ecosystems within park boundaries are affected by activities outside the park. In the Waterton area, the presence of wolves has created conflict between the ranchers' historical values and economic interests and the Waterton Lakes National Park ecological mandate. The ranchers' concern that wolves kill their livestock once they leave the park boundaries led to a Southwest Alberta Livestock Compensation Program introduced to compensate ranchers if their livestock were killed by wolves or bears. Despite the compensation program's efforts to meet the ranchers' economic needs, the program failed because the ranchers were adamantly opposed to the presence of wolves in the area. Consequently, the wolf population in the area decreased rapidly because of the actions of the ranchers, landowners, government agents, and hunters. ____________ Adapted from Reid, R. E. (1996). An investigation of human values: Building a foundation for indicators of ecologically sustainable tourism. (Master's thesis, University of Calgary). Ottawa: National Library of Canada. Microform TJ-18698. Copyright eContent Management Pty Ltd. Rural Society (2013) 22(2): 111-124. The mining boom and Western Australia's changing landscape: Towards sustainability or business as usual? MARTIN BRUECKNER, ANGELA DUREY*, ROBYN MAYES* AND CHRISTOF PFORR* Murdoch University, Perth, WA, Australia; *Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia Abstract: The practices and public reputation of mining have been changing over time. In the past, mining operations frequently stood accused of being socially and environmentally disruptive, whereas mining today invests heavily in 'socially responsible' and 'sustainable' business practices. Changes such as these can be witnessed internationally as well as in places like Western Australia (WA), where the mining sector has matured into an economic pillar of the state, and indeed the nation in the context of the recent resources boom. This paper explores the role of mining in WA, presenting a multidisciplinary perspective on the sector's contribution to sustainable development in the state. The perspectives offered here are drawn from community-based research and the associated academic literature as well as data derived from government sources and the not-for-profit sector. Findings suggest that despite noteworthy attitudinal and operational improvements in the industry, social, economic and environmental problem areas remain. As mining in WA is expected to grow in the years to come, these problem areas require the attention of business and government alike to ensure the long-term sustainability of development as well as people and place. Keywords: Western Australia, developmentalism, resource-based development, sustainable mining, sustainable development S ustainability and social responsibility are recent additions to the vocabulary of most mining companies (Yakovleva, 2005). Historically, the mining sector has a chequered performance record concerning the management of its social and environmental obligations (Jenkins, 2004). Also, more recent problems surrounding mining operations in places such as Papua New Guinea (Banks & Ballard, 1997) and Indonesia (Bruno & Karliner, 2002) are a reminder that disputes in mining cannot be consigned to history. Notwithstanding, the last two decades have seen positive changes in mining in response to growing concerns about the sector's social and environmental impacts. There is increased recognition that genuine engagement with environmental and social issues is a prerequisite for gaining and retaining companies' 'social licence to operate' (MMSD Project, 2002; Prno & Slocombe, 2012). Whilst in part responding to public and regulatory pressure, mining companies have also started to change practices in light of the benefits associated with responsible business conduct. The business cases for sustainable development and corporate social responsibility see socially responsible and environmentally sound business practices as contributing positively to the business bottom line (e.g., Holliday, Schmidheiny, & Watts, 2002; Hopkins, 2003). Yet, enlightened self-interest aside, what remains in question is whether such changes in sustainability practices in mining have been effective across the sector and led to a reduction in the impacts the sector has traditionally been having on people and place. The sustainability of the mining sector is a vexed issue. 'Sustainable mining' strikes some commentators as oxymoronic (Horowitz, 2006; Rajaram, Dutta, & Parameswaran, 2005) in that the nonrenewable character of mined resources implies that mining 'fails to qualify as sustainable development sensu stricto' (Amezaga, Rtting, & Younger, 2011, p. 21). Others see in sustainable mining a reference to corporate profits and economic development that will provide lasting value beyond the life of mining projects (Laurence, 2011), perceived yet again by others as a 'corporate strategy to conceal harm and neutralise critique' (Kirsch, 2010, p. 87). While noting this debate, for the purposes of this paper the emphasis will be placed on the contribution of mining to sustainable development sensu lato; understood here in terms of the way in which the sector balances social, economic and environmental interests (Rajaram et al., 2005) and contributes positively to development and community Volume 22, Issue 2, February 2013 RURAL SOCIETY 111 Martin Brueckner et al. well-being. This aligns with the general principles of sustainability (see MMSD Project, 2002) in mining supported by the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM). This paper explores the contribution of mining to sustainable development in Western Australia (WA). The mining sector has been the recipient of considerable support from successive state governments who have invested in the economic development and exploitation of the state's natural assets since foundation (Walker et al., 2002). The state government's 'developmentalist' drive (see Kellow & Niemeyer, 1999) reached new heights in recent years with the onset of the present mining boom, with the economic successes of the mining sector seemingly hardening the resolve of the state's political leadership to make WA 'the world's biggest resource industry [...] economy'(APPEA, 2011). To ensure that 'future growth is not hampered by structural impediments or red tape' the success of major resources projects has become the Premier's 'direct responsibility'(Barnett, 2009), resulting in recent years - inter alia - in the streamlining of government approval processes and fast-tracking of industry development applications. The government's overt support for the mining sector highlights its perceived importance to the well-being of the state and its economy measured along indicators such as income, employment and GDP growth. The resources boom has reignited research interest in, and public debate on, the costs and benefits mining delivers to society (Carrington & Pereira, 2011; Cleary, 2011; Cleary, 2012; Haslam McKenzie, 2011; Lawrie, Tonts, & Plummer, 2011; Mayes, 2008; Nicol, 2006). This article seeks to add to this debate by way of shedding light on the unevenness with which both the costs and benefits of the boom are being spread in WA. Based on empirical work and relevant academic literature as well as data derived from government sources and the not-for-profit sector we offer a multi-disciplinary account from behind the scenes of the mining boom, drawing attention to both direct and indirect impacts mining has on people and places in WA. Specifically, we focus on the economic, environmental, Indigenous and social dimensions of the mining boom. The findings inform a discussion which draws attention to the 112 RURAL SOCIETY need for a more balanced treatment of the positive and negative impacts of mining - amplified by the current boom - to arrive at a more robust assessment of the mining industry's contribution to the sustainability of development in the state. THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF MINING IN WA The economic benefits of WA's mining boom have been widely publicised and are often used to highlight the importance of the sector to the well-being of the state by industry, government and its departments (Barnett, 2011; Department of Mines and Petroleum [DMP], 2012; Mining Council Australia, 2012). Commonly cited benefits are summarised below. In WA, there are currently 1050 operating mine sites, around 170 mineral processing plants and over 70 operating oil and gas fields, which form the hub of the state's economic success story and contribute around 29% to overall production in the state (Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS], 2012d) and 95% of merchandise exports (ABS, 2012d). The growth in mining output and export value can be explained in terms of high export prices and growth in demand for key commodities in recent years. Key export commodities for WA are iron ore and concentrates with an export value of $13.6 billion, which rose over 70% within the last 24 months as well as energy resources such as natural gas with a current export value of nearly $2.1 billion (ABS, 2011c). These trends, despite current signs of slowing (Wade & Martin, 2012), are believed to continue in light of ongoing investments in the sector and related industries (ABS, 2012d; National Australia Bank, 2012). State revenue has certainly benefitted from the mining boom with the resources sector contributing around 30%. In 2010-2011 the sector generated $4.9 billion in royalties paid for the Western Australian Government Consolidated Revenue Fund (DMP, 2011), which represents a 375% increase from $1.03 billion in 2001- 2002. Since 2008, 25% of the state's mining and onshore petroleum royalties have been distributed annually to the state's regional areas via the royalties for regions programme ($817.8 million in 2012-2011). This programme aims to build the strength and vibrancy of regional, rural Volume 22, Issue 2, February 2013 eContent Management Pty Ltd The mining boom and Western Australia's changing landscape and remote communities by providing funding to supplement current infrastructure projects, community service programmes and competitive grant opportunities (Department of Regional Development and Lands [DRDL], 2011). The resources sector's growth has been accompanied by strong employment growth in mining. While only 3.6% of WA's work force was employed in the sector in 2000 (ABS, 2012c), this figure is now believed to have risen to around 10% (Williams, 2012). The employment growth is also reflected in the overall population levels in WA with 2011 census figures revealing that WA's population boomed since the 2006 census recording a 14.3% increase over the 5-year period (ABS, 2012d). In terms of income generation, WA's mining boom has been responsible for sharp increases in weekly earnings with five of the state's mining towns ranking among the nation's richest top ten postcodes; Dampier is leading with 22% of its residents earning more than $4000 per week (ABS, 2012a). Recent years saw wage increases in WA outperform those of all other states, with males employed in mining registering the strongest growth of 33% between 1998 and 2009 (ABS, 2009). The economic benefits that mining delivers in terms of its contribution to state revenue and regional development as well as employment and income are widely seen as the sector's key contribution to the state. While these benefits cannot be denied, data reveal that these benefits are not only spread unevenly but also that some segments of society suffer economic hardship consequent to mining. Income growth as a result of the mining boom has largely been restricted to people employed within the resources sector; a situation mirrored nationally (Richardson & Denniss, 2011). Record income growth in mining has occurred parallel to only very modest income growth in sectors such as hospitality (ABS, 2009). CPI-adjusted incomes across most income categories fell in recent years making WA the state with the highest but also most uneven incomes of any state with a Gini coefficient1 of 0.367 (ABS, 2011b). 1 The Gini coefficient is a measure of income inequality in a society. Zero indicates total equality, and 1 indicates maximal inequality. eContent Management Pty Ltd Income disparities have flow-on effects, especially during periods of growing price pressures. The time between 2006 and 2008 saw household costs increase by approximately $132 per week or 23% on basic living expenses as suggested by the Western Australian Council of Social Service [WACOSS] (2009). ABS data also point to sharp price rises between 2009 and 2011 in the cost of essential items such as food (7%), utilities (32%) and health (9%, ABS, 2011a). The situation is arguably worse in the area of housing. It is estimated that WA's boom has attracted around 1000 new arrivals to the state per week in recent years with the resultant housing demand driving up house prices and the cost of rental accommodation. Real Estate Institute of WA (REIWA) data indicate that the median weekly rent for Perth in the December 2011 quarter was $400 per week - an increase of 8.1% from 12 months earlier - which represents over 65% of the 2011 weekly WA state minimum wage (WACOSS, 2012). The median house price in Perth is at around $480,000. Overall, the boom has meant that low-income earners needed to absorb higher costs for basic living essentials and housing while at the same time facing reductions in real income. This is also mirrored in the statistics of social service providers who point to a growing number of incidences of economic hardship (e.g., The Salvation Army Australia, 2012). In rural and remote parts of WA such mining boom-related impacts are even more pronounced. REIWA (2012a, 2012b) points to median house prices for mining towns like Karratha and Port Hedland at $890,000 and $702,000 respectively with a median cost of rental accommodation of around $1,500 per week. The high wages realised in the mining sector in these parts of the country also stand in stark contrast to the structural disadvantage experienced there. While high incomes are recorded across the Pilbara and Kimberly regions where mining occurs, these areas also record high, localised unemployment and low-income (ABS, 2012b), creating a high-income-low-income dualism in WA which is reflected nationally in the two-speed economy (Goodman & Worth, 2008). As argued by Langton (2010), the mining boom drives and accelerates disparity between towns in WA. Volume 22, Issue 2, February 2013 RURAL SOCIETY 113 Martin Brueckner et al. In this regard the aforementioned royalties for regions programme promises relief through targetted funding to help counteract boom-induced housing shortages and escalating prices by way of investing - inter alia - in social infrastructure. Thus far, however, progress has been slow (The Australian Mining Review, 2012), with the programme also receiving criticism for purportedly making funding available along political as opposed to socio-economic lines (Powel & Thompson, 2012). At the political level, problems surrounding cost of living increases and housing shortages are recognised. Growing public housing waiting lists, however, attest to a degree of policy inertia despite calls for urgent government action (Community Housing Coalition WA, 2012). Undeniably, the mining boom delivers economic benefits for the state; the benefits of such economic success, however, are found to be limited to people working in the industry whilst the costs of the boom are largely borne by structurally weaker community groups across WA. Many of these adverse effects cannot be attributed to mining directly. Nonetheless, the dramatic growth of the industry in recent years did have large, indirect community impacts felt across the state. MINING AND THE ENVIRONMENT Notwithstanding greater awareness, improved practices and more exacting environmental regulations, the resource intensity of WA's economic activities and the extraction of primary materials remain inevitably linked to environmental degradation. In fact, the scale of the unprecedented expansion of the WA mining sector and the associated direct and indirect environmental changes represent key challenges for the sector's sustainability (Mudd, 2010). The discussion on the sector's environmental performance should not only pay attention to direct, site-specific impacts but also take into account cumulative impacts and indirect effects that pose environmental and social challenges in the state and beyond. These larger scale impacts are, for example, linked to major infrastructure developments (e.g., roads, ports), the expansion of human settlements as well as fly-in/fly-out (FIFO) work patterns, which are all products of 114 RURAL SOCIETY a rapidly growing resource extraction sector. Also, the promotion of multiple land use to foster rapid economic growth and development has led to growing tension mainly between three traditional private sector industries, mining, pastoralism and tourism. All are environmentally intense and compete for the same natural resources. Land use conflicts between these sectors, which challenge the common assumption that the immense size of the state provides almost unlimited resources for its economy, are thus also a logical consequence of WA's mining boom (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population, & Communities, 2011; Hughes & Catlin, 2010). The environmental impacts of WA's natural resource exploitation such as loss of biodiversity, water shortage and pollution and the production of large quantities of waste are discussed in more detail below. The exact nature and extent of these impacts is dependent on a number of factors, including the mode of extraction and the operation of the mine (e.g., open cut or underground), its geographical location and the phase of its operatio