ABSTRACT
This chapter continues its reframing of the existing discourse of ‘environmental sustainability’, asking whether designers should become the facilitators of flow (Wood, 2000), rather than the originators of maintainable ‘things’ such as discrete products or images. The previous chapter’s discussion of metadesign acts as a pretext for this enquiry. Chapter 8 argued that, in order to design effectively at the level of ‘living styles’ designers would need to create a ‘synergy of synergies’ (Fuller, 1975). This would call for us to understand more deeply how things change. It is especially poignant for western discourse, which has frequently been associated with an emphasis on materiality and durability, rather than ‘flow’ (cf. Capra, 1975). In addition to the chapter’s philosophical challenge to the popular notion of ‘sustainability’ there is also a practical purpose. In 1987, the Brundtland Report’s term ‘sustainable development’ was defined as development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (Brundtland, 1987). Since then, a proliferation of conflicting definitions has emerged around the world. Some researchers have counted at least 70 different uses for the term ‘sustainability’. This chapter argues that, since 1987, subsequent terms such as ‘sustainable business’ and ‘sustainable consumption’ appear to emphasise certainty and permanence, rather than ecological cohesion. At the practical level this has strained the credibility of ‘sustainability’ as a useful generic term. So why is it still the touchstone of environmentalism?
