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 -