Sustainability and uncertainty: bottom-up and top-down approaches
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Sustainability and uncertainty : bottom-up and top-down approaches. / Jensen, Karsten Klint.
In: Italian Journal of Animal Science, Vol. 6, No. Suppl. 1, 2007, p. 853-855.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Sustainability and uncertainty
T2 - bottom-up and top-down approaches
AU - Jensen, Karsten Klint
PY - 2007
Y1 - 2007
N2 - The widely used concept of sustainability is seldom precisely defined, and its clarification involves making up one's mind about a range of difficult questions. One line of research (bottom-up) takes sustaining a system over time as its starting point and then infers prescriptions from this requirement. Another line (top-down) takes an economical interpretation of the Brundtland Commission's suggestion that the present generation's needsatisfaction should not compromise the need-satisfaction of future generations as its starting point. It then measures sustainability at the level of society and infers prescriptions from this requirement.These two approaches may conflict, and in this conflict the top-down approach has the upper hand, ethically speaking. However, the implicit goal in the top-down approach of justice between generations needs to be refined in several dimensions. But even given a clarified ethical goal, disagreements can arise. At present we do not know what substitutions will be possible in the future.This uncertainty clearly affects the prescriptions that follow from the measure of sustainability. Consequently, decisions about how to make future agriculture sustainable are decisions under uncertainty. There might be different judgments on likelihoods; but even given some set of probabilities, there might be disagreement on the right level of precaution in face of the uncertainty.
AB - The widely used concept of sustainability is seldom precisely defined, and its clarification involves making up one's mind about a range of difficult questions. One line of research (bottom-up) takes sustaining a system over time as its starting point and then infers prescriptions from this requirement. Another line (top-down) takes an economical interpretation of the Brundtland Commission's suggestion that the present generation's needsatisfaction should not compromise the need-satisfaction of future generations as its starting point. It then measures sustainability at the level of society and infers prescriptions from this requirement.These two approaches may conflict, and in this conflict the top-down approach has the upper hand, ethically speaking. However, the implicit goal in the top-down approach of justice between generations needs to be refined in several dimensions. But even given a clarified ethical goal, disagreements can arise. At present we do not know what substitutions will be possible in the future.This uncertainty clearly affects the prescriptions that follow from the measure of sustainability. Consequently, decisions about how to make future agriculture sustainable are decisions under uncertainty. There might be different judgments on likelihoods; but even given some set of probabilities, there might be disagreement on the right level of precaution in face of the uncertainty.
KW - Former LIFE faculty
KW - empirical uncertainty
KW - goals and means
KW - value judgements
M3 - Journal article
VL - 6
SP - 853
EP - 855
JO - Italian Journal of Animal Science
JF - Italian Journal of Animal Science
SN - 1594-4077
IS - Suppl. 1
ER -
ID: 8098267