Defining sustainability, adaptation and resilience

As risk reduction and natural resource management practitioners and educators with combined experience of over 45 years we have led approaches focusing on integrated planning, natural resource management, triple bottom line, economically sustainability development, sustainability, resilience, climate change adaptation, critical infrastructure resilience, adaptation and emergency planning for all-hazards and business continuity planning for sustainable human and natural systems.   

The concepts of sustainability and ecological sustainable development are not new, just the focus and approach. Pivotal pieces such as Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring (1962), 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment and Limits to Growth Report; the 1987 Brundtland Report defined sustainable development; and the 1990s Rio de Janeiro Summit’s Agenda 21 and the UN framework Convention on Climate Change defined the foundational ecological sustainable governance (ESG) criteria.  

The above approaches have similar overarching and complementary principles. The different approaches and focus are reflective of prevailing government policies and societal expectations, particularly current policy on the management of climate change impacts and a drive towards a greener economy. Since the 1980s there has been considerable intellectual and financial capital invested to tackle issues growth and sustainability.   

Our focus in this space is on the actions needed to address hazards or threats from climate to the long term functioning of society.  We have a particular focus on outcomes such as sustainability, adaptation, resilience, risk reduction and mitigation. These terms are in common usage, and often used interchangeably throughout policy and planning processes, government funded and grants programs and academia.  

Our view is that adaptation focuses on actions to reduce the effects of hazards, including those affected by climate change. These adaptation actions contribute to the resilience of individuals, communities, critical services and systems, which enables a healthy and productive society i.e., sustainability. This means that adaptation and resilience enable sustainability.  

Risk reduction and adaptation in our view are interchangeable, though the term adaptation tends to be used to refer to adaptation to climate related natural hazards(a subset of natural hazards), while risk reduction tends to focus on a broader spectrum of hazards and threats.

Mitigation is another term in common usage but can cause confusion in the adaptation space. Mitigation is often used to refer to the reduction of green house gas emissions, which can reduce the impacts of climate change on natural hazards in the disaster risk reduction space. In the resilience and risk reduction sphere, can also refer to actions to reduce all types of hazards, e.g. a flood mitigation dam.   

‍ ‍

Sustainability 

Sustainability is a dynamic process that aims to maintain a certain quality of life, meeting present needs without compromising the future. It requires balancing managing growth and use of natural assets with social, economic and cultural heritage needs over the longer term. In ecological terms it is maintaining dynamic equilibrium between our human systems and the environment.

Sustainability can be seen as an overarching or umbrella term for this work. Resilience and adaptation can be seen as key components of the long term sustainability planning umbrella.  

Adaptation  

Adaptation is a process or a set of actions for people, biological and human systems to adjust or better able adapt to current or future projected hazard impacts to reduce the risk to life and societal costs on wellbeing, the economy and the environment.  

Climate change adaptation 

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defines adaptation as the process taken to “adjust to the actual or expected climate and its effects”. 

Resilience 

Resilience is the capacity of systems or an ability to anticipate, to prepare for, withstand, absorb, and recover from shocks and stresses, allowing a system to continue functioning and provide services to changing conditions in a timely manner. There is a strong behavioural and social dimension to resilience. Resilient people, communities and systems have the capacity and capability to adapt to uncertainty and unexpected events or disruptions.   

The IPCC defines resilience as the capacity of social, economic and environmental systems to cope with a hazardous event or trend or disturbance, responding or reorganizing in ways that maintain their essential function, identity and structure, while also maintaining the capacity for adaptation, learning and transformation. The IPCC define resilience as the ability of systems, institutions, humans and other organisms to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences.  

Conclusion 

In short, sustainability, adaptation and resilience programs to reduce climate, natural and anthropogenic risks often overlap in scope. For example, a resilience program often includes adaptation measures to reduce risk from climate related and non-climate related hazards, which supports long term sustainability. 

Clarity of terms and objectives is critical for successful program development and implementation. Not identifying related programs and previous work across sustainability, resilience and adaptation fields, can result in duplication of effort, confusion, and dilution of resources. This can result in conflicting approaches that are difficult to explain to community and funding providers. It can also result in decision paralysis, and presents challenges in attributing benefits to actions across related programs. In practice, there is tendency to view risk reduction according to the governance arrangements and regulatory responsibilities such as emergency and disaster management sector, land use and climate change adaptation planners. Regardless of the risk reduction planning process,  it is imperative to adopt a collaborative holistic approach that recognises the interconnection of actions between relevant planning process for best utilisation of resources and optimal outcomes.  

Do you agree with our view that sustainability, adaptation and resilience programs to reduce climate, natural and anthropogenic risks overlap in scope? Do you agree with our definition of these terms?