caa a22 4500 469101741 CHVBK 20180323133046.0 cr unu---uuuuu 170328e19921101xx s 000 0 eng 10.1007/BF00138021 doi (NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/BF00138021 Brooks David Environment Program, International Development Research Centre, Box 8500, K1G 3H9, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada aut The challenge of sustainability: Is integrating environment and economy enough? [Elektronische Daten] [David Brooks] Conclusions: Beyond Interdependence, along with each of the other books, appeared after publication of Our Common Future but before the Earth Summit in Rio. It was a time to be optimistic, and each book is optimistic, if cautiously so. Certainly the impact of the Brundtland Report has been enormous, perhaps not beyond the dreams of the members of the Commission, but certainly beyond their expectations. The impact of the Earth Summit has been much smaller, certainly well short of the dreams of those involved though perhaps within their expectations. If the Brundtland Report and the books reviewed in this essay show the potential, the Earth Summit shows the limits. What have been called the ‘inner limits' of interests, institutions, and politics turn out to be far more important than the ‘outer limits' of ecology and even economics. The next steps are going to be difficult, and books such as Beyond Interdependence are needed to indicate when, where and how to take such steps. There may eventually be a ‘Mark II framework convention for climate change, forestry and biodiversity' (p. 115-116), but along the way there will be many more national actions, bi- or tri-national agreements, and Montreal Protocols. In the words of MacNeill, Winsemius and Yakushiji (p. 117), ‘A Grand Global Bargain could be the sum of 1,000 small bargains.' Even if, in my view and the views of Goodland et al. and Meadows et al., Beyond Interdependence is inadequate to get us onto a fully sustainable path, there is little if anything in its recommendations that would be inappropriate in our search for that path. How can we go beyond integration of environment and economy? A number of authors have begun to make suggestions (e.g., Ekins, 1987; Brooks, 1991; Durning, 1992; Harrison, 1992). Certainly, one can agree with MacNeill, Winsemius and Yakushiji that we need not spend any more time defining ‘sustainable development.' (By 1990, there were already some 40 definitions in the literature.) The definition provided by the Brundtland Report is good enough for working purposes. What is needed now is not more discussion about sustainable development but more experimentation with it. We must try different development strategies, and keep trying until the best fit is found for particular times, particular places and particular peoples. Some policies will get us closer; others will turn out to be inefficient, destructive, or inequitable. But the experiments must continue until each community finds a set that works economically, ecologically and politically. In the words of Rabbi Tarphon, who lived nearly two millennia ago and contributed to the Talmud, ‘It is not up to us to complete the task, but neither are we free to refrain from getting started on it.' Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1992 Policy Sciences Springer US 25/4(1992-11-01), 401-408 0032-2687 25:4<401 1992 25 11077 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138021 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI 1 research-article jats NATIONALLICENCE 856 40 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138021 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI NATIONALLICENCE 100 1- Brooks David Environment Program, International Development Research Centre, Box 8500, K1G 3H9, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada aut NATIONALLICENCE 773 0- Policy Sciences Springer US 25/4(1992-11-01), 401-408 0032-2687 25:4<401 1992 25 11077 Metadata rights reserved Springer special CC-BY-NC licence nationallicence BK010053 XK010053 XK010000 NATIONALLICENCE NATIONALLICENCE NL-springer