Integral.sustainability.assessment

7/30/2019 Integral.sustainability.assessment

1/8

emrgnc

www.emrgnc.com.au

IntegralSustainability

Assessment:

AnEmergentHolarchyofPrinciplesBByyWWiilllliiaammVVaarreeyy eemmrrggnncc((FFoouunnddeerr))

IntroductionSustainabilityassessmentistheprocesswhichhonourstheintentionofsustainability

bydeterminingwhetherwhatweareintendingtodowillbesustainable,beforewe

doit.Apartialapproachthatdefeatsthatprocessalsodefeatsourintention,andasa

consequence,ourhopeforasustainableworld.

AsdifferentexperiencesoftheSustainabilityAssessmentprocessaresharedandthe

casestudyanecdotalevidenceaccumulates,thecomplexityoftheinterrelationshipof

the issues involved entreats us to seek an integral approach to assessing

sustainability.

Inapplyingan integralapproachwemustfirstrecognizethatanywholeconcept is

madeup toholonsorwholeparts.Sustainabilityasawhole conceptmust, tobe

treatedin

awhole

way,

be

dealt

with

as

awhole.

The

framing

of

sustainability

around the fourquadrantsofaholon,being the intentional, thecultural, thesocial

and thephysical, isourplaceofbeginningandend (Wilber1995,1996,1997,1998,

2000, 2001). Omitting our consideration of one quadrant, or one level in any

quadrant,prejudicesourconsiderationofthewhole.

Whiletheconceptofsustainabilityisdevelopingintheintentionalquadrant(UL),is

supportedbyobjectiveanalysis in thephysicalquadrant (UR)and is thesubjectof

increasing collective concern in the culturalquadrant (LL), it isour social systems

(LR)that

are

lacking

in

comparative

development.

FourQuadrantsLowerRightFocusIn examining the social systems that support sustainability,we canview,but one

fragment of the integral, in the line of development thatmaps the processes of

sustainability assessment. This line in the Lower Right quadrant (LR) represents

whensustainabilityismadevisibleinthepatternsandprocessesoftheassessmentof

theimpactsandbenefitsthatresultfromtheintentions(UL),values(LL)andactions

(UR)of

sustainability.


2/8

emrgnc

www.emrgnc.com.au

TheLowerRightquadrantrepresentsalltheexteriorformsofsocialsystems,forms

thatcanbeseen, forms thatareempiricalandbehavioural.Thisquadrantrefers to

anyof the concrete,material, embedded social formsof communities (the exterior

formsofsocialsystems)thatareexterioraction,wheresomethingisreallyrealif

itsdatacanbeseenempirically(Wilber1995).

Figure1:(Source:KenWilber(1995)Sex,Ecologyand Spirituality:Thespiritofevolution)

Sustainability assessment is where we prospectively assess and design for

sustainability impacts. Itdiffersfrom theassessmentofenvironmental impactsofa

prescribed solution only to have to mitigate those impacts retrospectively.

Acknowledging thenecessity for thesocialandstructural insustainability (ieit is

not sustainablebecause I think it is,orwe say it is butbecausewemake it so)

functionalsustainabilityassessmentisonepartofthesustainabilitypicture.

Abarrier to thedevelopmentofproficiency insustainabilityassessment inexisting

socialand

political

systems

(and

therefore

our

ability

to

enact

sustainability)

is

the

unfamiliarityofnewprocesseswithina significantdiversityof situations.Withno

clearintegralinstructionmanualtheemergentapproachesaremeshedintoconflict

withexistingstructuresandcanonlyhopetobepartial.Wehaveapathologyofthe

LowerRightinthesystemconflictsthatdevelop.

This isoften seen in conflictsofgovernanceand inpolicydevelopment,wherewe

knowsomethingisnotsustainablebutdecidetodoitanyway,becausetheexisting

structuresrequireittobedone.


3/8

emrgnc

www.emrgnc.com.au

DevelopmentofAssessmentPrinciplesTo provide some guidance within this complexity, one learning community in

Western Australia has sought to develop a set of Principles for Sustainability

Assessment.A

workshop

of

practitioners

from

arange

of

government

instrumentalities was heldwhich yielded eighty three anecdotes of positive and

negative (andcategoricallyneutral) facetsofdifferentsustainabilityassessmentson

large infrastructuredevelopmentprojectswithsignificantsocialandenvironmental

impacts.Thisexperience identified fragmentedparts in thisaspectof theemergent

holarchy.

Thesemany anecdoteswere coded into a series of recurrent themes around the

commonissues.Theseincludedproblemswithprocess,decisionmaking,community

consultation,

policy

development,

scope

and

definition.

Using

a

process

of

holistic

structuralism, 7 levels of nested complexity that relate to integral levels of

development of the principles of sustainability assessmentwere identifiedwithin

theserecurrentthemesandthecollectiveexperienceoftheparticipants.

HolarchyofLevelsofAssessmentPrinciplesThe levels identifiedwithin the holarchy asmapped along this particular line of

developmentare:

A: Sustainability Definitional Principles: The definitional components of theconceptualisationofsustainability(e.g.thewhatistobesustained,forwhoandover

whichtimeframe).

B: Sustainability Core Principles: The degree of integration and tradeoff ofenvironmental, economic, social and other considerations that fall within that

definition(e.g.whethertheprinciplesreflectweakorstrongsustainabilitywithinthe

definition)

C:SustainabilityGuidingPrinciples:The interpretationof thecoreprinciples intostatements of subprinciple for each of the dimensions of sustainability (e.g. the

approachtobiodiversity,importanceofindigenoussocialconsiderationsetc).

D: Sustainability Assessment Design Principles: The principles that guide theselectionofcomponentsinthedesignofasustainabilityassessmentframework(e.g.

Issue Definition, Outcome Criteria, Decision Criteria, Assessment Scales, Impact

Analysisetc).


4/8

emrgnc

www.emrgnc.com.au

E: Sustainability Assessment Process Principles: The principleswhich determinethenumberandorderofstages inanassessmentprocess in linear timeorder (e.g.

roleofcommunityconsultation,timingofdecisions,followupassessmentsetc.).

F: Sustainability Assessment Policy Principles: The principles that determine atwhatleveltheassessmentshouldbedealtwithwithinsociopoliticalstructures(e.g.

ieparliament,premier, cabinet, independentarbiter,advisorygroup,departmental

policy,departmentalprogram,proponentledinternaldecisionmakingetc.).

G:SustainabilityAssessmentHolarchicalPrinciples:Theprinciples thatprescribethe translevel integration and management between levels to ensure an

apithologicalholarchywithouthierarchicalorheterarchicalpathology(e.g.principles

forthealignmentofeachearlierlevelofprinciples).

HolarchyIntegrityUnlikethelevelsofotherquadrants,thelevelsoftheLowerRightQuadrantmaynot

necessarilyoccur in structure in theorderof theirphysical size,as systems in the

LowerRight areby theirnaturenonphysical,notbeing in the individual, instead

beingvisibleintheexteriorasthesumofcollectiveprocesses.

Figure2:(Source:KenWilber(1995)Sex,Ecologyand Spirituality:Thespiritofevolution)

Asimilarpatternisseenalongthelinethatindicatesthedevelopmentoftheintegral

principlesforsustainabilityassessmentwithinaholarchy,withtheincreasebylevel

indepthshowingadecreaseinthespan,butnotnecessarilylimiting,innumber,the

principleswithineachlevel.


5/8

emrgnc

www.emrgnc.com.au

1. definitional principles

2. core principles

3. guiding principles

4. design principles

5. process principles

6. policy principles

7. holarchy principlesLower RightExterior-Collective

(Social)

ITS

Figure3:Levelsof IntegralDevelopmentinSustainabilityAssessmentPrinciples(LR)

The

levels

within

one

quadrant

of

a

holarchy

can

be

established

by

several

objective criteria:by a qualitative emergence,by asymmetry,by an inclusionary

principle, by a developmental logic; by a chronological indicator; all while

recognising thepurelyarbitrarynatureof thenumberof levels inaholon (Wilber

1995).

Usingthetestforholarchicaldevelopment,thatahigherlevelholoniscomposedof

its lower levelholons,andthus ifwedestroyany lower, level,wewillalsodestroy

anylevelsaboveitbecausewehavetakenawaysomeoftheircomponentparts,we

canconfirmthelevelsoftheparticularlinewithintheholarchyasdescribed.

ForLevelG.onHolarchicalPrinciples, iftherearenopolicylevelsthereisnoneed

forprinciplesofinterlevelinteraction,andpriortotranslevelintegrationthesystem

canstillfunctionwithinlevels.ForLevelF.onPolicyLevelPrinciples,ifthereareno

processes,thentherearenointrapolicylevelconsiderations.ForLevelE.onProcess

Principles,iftherearenocomponentsofanassessmentprocessthereisnoneedfora

process sequence. For Level D. on Design Principles, if there are no guiding

principles then theassessmentcomponentscannotbedetermined. ForLevelC.on

GuidingPrinciples,iftherearenocoreelements,acompletesetofguidingprinciples

cannotbe

established.

For

Level

B.

on

Core

Principles

if

there

is

no

underlying

component definition of sustainability, there can be no delineation of degree of

integration. For Level A. on Definitional Principles, if there are no fundamental

elements that comprise the definition, the concept of sustainability is rendered

meaninglessandheldonlyintheintentional,existingonlyasaneuralsynapsepulse,

and as avague culturalvibe,never to enter into the structureof languageor any

other structural element of the social systems in a real form so as to become

manifest.

Thereforeif

we

lack

one

level

of

the

holarchy,

we

compromise

the

effectiveness

in

termsof integral integrityofall the levelsabove. Ifwe lackonepartof this lineof


6/8

emrgnc

www.emrgnc.com.au

development within the sustainability holarchy, we will not have the structural

systems to manage all levels in the Lower Right quadrant, andmay fail in the

implementation and integration of the intentional, physical or common cultural

elementsthatdefineoursustainableworld.

SummaryThe analysis indicates that a failure of clarity in the practice of sustainability

assessment as one line of development in one quadrant of thewhole impairs the

abilityforanintegralapproachtosustainabilitytosucceedinitsentirety.

Thelevelsinthepartialholarchydevelopedconfirmthesourceoffrustrationinthe

community of sustainability practitioners at: 1. not having clear definitional

principles

for

sustainability,

2.

the

differing

principles

for

integration

of

definitional

components indeveloping tradeoffs inweakandstrongsustainabilityconcepts,3.

the lackofadefinitivesetofcomponentsforassessmentframeworks,4.the lackof

transparency in the governance of assessment processes, 5. the lack of belief in

assessmentprocessesinrepresentingcommunityvalues,6.thepolicylevelconflicts

that existbetween assessment processes and 7. the nonintegration of thewhole

systemasaholarchy,suggestingthepresenceofasystemicpathology.

However,whatshouldberememberedisthatdevelopmentwithinthisLowerRight

quadrant hasboth thebenefit and the impediment of other established systems,

providingaplatformfornewprocesstoemerge,butfindingaconflictwithinthose

existingsystemstotheextenttheyareclosedtonewideas(seenintheEIAandSEA

discussions of impact assessment).We get there faster,but find ourpathblocked

sooner.

Partial approaches to the integration of the assessmentholarchy (Varey 2003), the

principles of definition (Varey 2004a, 2004b), the integrated delineation of

components of assessment frameworks (2004c), the alignment of systems within

policy levels (2004a) and a rebalancing of systemic pathology (2004d), begin a

contributionto

the

integral

map,

but

do

not

complete

it.

As development occurs in the other quadrants in our individual understanding,

shared community values and the validity of empirical analysis around

sustainability, so too will development in our sustainability assessment systems

naturallyemerge.

Thechallengeinthemeantimeisnotto losefocusonthewholewhiledealingwith

the frustrationsof thedevelopmentof theparts,and instead tosimplynurture the

emergenceof

the

integrity

of

our

entire

growth

in

the

ways

we

see,

feel,

act

and

think

ourwaytoamoreintegralandsustainableexistence.


7/8

emrgnc

www.emrgnc.com.au

ByWilliamVarey

30October2004

BioWilliamVareyBJuris.,LLB(Hons),MLM(Distn)worksinthedevelopmentofsustainabilityframeworks inthestateandlocalgovernment,privateindustryandnotforprofitsectors.Heisthefounderofemrgnc,aforumfor

consciousness evolution. He is presently working on predoctoral research into the theories of growth of

organisations and integrated models for sustainable organisational development, extending on his Masters

research into thedynamicsofgenerative learning inorganisations.He isanAssociateFellowof theAustralian

Institute of Management (AFAIM) and a member of the MultiNational Alliance for the Advancement of

OrganisationalExcellence(MAAOE)andtheAssociationforHumanisticPsychology(AHP).Hecanbecontacted

at:[email protected]

Tel+61894334255

Fax+61894334155

Mail:POBox1402

WestPerth6872

WesternAustralia

www.emrgnc.com.au


8/8

emrgnc

www.emrgnc.com.au

ReferencesVarey,W(2003)Sustainability:FromBuzzwordtoBusinessPractice,ReflectionsinExcellenceArticleSeries,Available onlineURL http://www.fcg.com.au/reflections/sustex5.html [Accessed: 17October

2004]

Varey,W

(2004a)

TransformingSustainability:Anintegralleadersframework,Spirituality

LeadershipandManagementNetworkConference,February2004,AvailableonlineURL,

http://www.emrgnc.com.au/sustainability.htm[Accessed:17October2004]

Varey,W(2004b)DefinitionsofSustainability:Thegoodthebeautifulandthetrue,AvailableonlineURL,http://www.emrgnc.com.au/sustainability.htm[Accessed:17October2004]

Varey,W(2004c)IntegratedApproachestoSustainabilityAssessment,AvailableonlineURL,http://www.emrgnc.com.au/sustainability.htm[Accessed:17October2004]

Varey,W(2004d)Apithology:Anemergentcontinuum,AvailableonlineURL,http://www.emrgnc.com.au/

papers.htm

[Accessed:

17

October

2004]

WilberK,(1995)SexEcologyandSpirituality:Thespiritof evoltution, Shambhala,Boston.Wilber,K.(1996)ABriefHistoryofEverything,Shambhala,Boston.Wilber,K.(1997) AnIntegralTheoryofConsciousness,JournalofConsciousnessStudies,(February1997).4(1):7192

WilberK.(1998)TheMarriageofSenseandSoul,GillandMacmillianLimited,DublinWilber,

K.

(2000)

Integral Psychology: Consciousness, Spirit, Psychology, Therapy, Boston,Mass:

ShambhalaPublications.

Wilber,K.(2001)ATheoryofEverything:AnIntegralVisionforBusiness,Politics,ScienceandSpirituality,FirstPaperbackEdition,Boston,Mass:ShambhalaPublications

Documents

Integral.sustainability.assessment