Literature reviews
SmartBarrow Process: Online Research
Sustainability literature review
The first significant usage of the term “sustainability” was by the Brundland commission in its 1987 report. It defined the term as “meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to do the same”. (Brundland, 1987). Since then an inordinate number of interpretations of sustainability have been offered. At best, these try to address the antagonisms of the oxymoronic expression. At worst they are greenwash to cover practices which are anything but sustainable. The term ‘sustainability’ is thus problematic and debased. At the same time, as a concept it has many detractors. “On the one hand the conventional wisdom describes us as masters of the planet destined to become ever more numerous and rich without explaining how this is possible or why it might be desirable.” (Orr. np. 2003) Howard and Elisabeth Odum however, view the systems of the planet as an ecology which operates within universal energy laws. (Odum, 2001, p.5) Permaculturists such as Holmgren (2009) accept that we are entering a down cycle following the exhaustion of key mineral resources and propose transitionary strategies to design planned responses to retreat as an alternative to the civilisational collapse discussed by Tainter, (2008).
The triple bottom line, of social, environmental and economic factors is an established concept in business sustainability, developed by Emerson under the term ‘Blended Value’. (Emerson, 2003). While the economic bottom line meets the basic preconditions of business activity, it does not address the impact of business practice on people and the planet. A new wave of social entrepreneurs are developing creative business models which account for the complexities of human and environmental value systems. Like shifting tectonic plates, an imbalance or change in one area impacts directly on the other two. Developing a sustainable triple bottom line is a game of twisting and tweaking the variables and constantly adapting to ever-shifting contexts.
- Creative Communities
Manzini’s notion of “creative communities” provided a guiding framework for our project. In order to solve the global problem of sustainable development mankind needs to find new answers on the local level by “radical innovations introduced to local systems” (Meroni, 2007: 13).
Creative communities are then (1) locally organized, i.e. by making good use of the local context and the different kinds of capital available on the local level, (2) they also connect to the global scale of similar communities to exchange practices and share experiences (3) they appreciate the individual and aim to balance the interests of society and the individual people living within them (Meroni, 2007:14).
Another important concept here is the notion of “permaculture” which was originally coined by Bill Millison in 1978 (Diver, 2002). This philosophy argues for a holistic integration of food supply, living and working on the local level in order to create ecologically operating habitats for humans.
Business literature increasingly recognizes the importance of local networks. Local “embeddedness” encourages risk-taking by local entrepreneurs and thereby enhances flexibility (Staber, 1996: 148). Unlike to traditional transaction cost economics, information is not only a commodity to trade but rather a product from social relationships and trust. Increased resilience in local networks then seems to be an enabler of radical change on the local level.
- Transition Network
The Transition Network is an existing group of communities in the United Kingdom. Transition Network’s role is to inspire, encourage, connect, support and train communities as they self-organise around the transition model, creating initiatives that rebuild resilience and reduce CO2 emissions. (Transition Network, 2010). The Transition Network consists of many smaller communities, usually focused around a town or city, or indeed a part of a large city. Transition City Lancaster is the transition group for the City of Lancaster. The team decided to engage with this community to see what they thought of our ideas and how they can be improved or adapted. Further, we asked the group of any contacts that would be useful for our project, they directed us to a number of farmers who we had fruitful discussions with. To our group, the Transition City Lancaster community seemed the ideal people to speak to regarding our idea. These are people who are committed in leading the way to a transition to a sustainable community. Although they are primarily concerned with reducing reliance on oil (completely reasonable, as this is the most pressing issue in this domain), they were happy to listen to our ideas and suggestions.
Community Supported Agriculture
Sustainable agriculture seeks to develop farming systems which have lower impact on the environment (e.g. soil, pesticides, oil consumption) compared to industrial methods (Hirrigan et al, 2002). It features following characteristics:
- It is long-term orientated focusing on the prevention of soil erosion and loss of biodiversity
- It appreciates the local environment: Goods are produced which place specific. Morgan (2010) notes that designing sustainable food systems does not mean put sustainability synonymous to local production (Morgan, 2010: 1858). Sustainable food systems combine the local and the global giving food sourcing a “hybrid and cosmopolitan character”)
- It is dynamic and responsive to changes in the social, ecological and economical context
- It is holistic in nature and views agricultural production as part of a wider system of human food supply chain. It can be argued that it appreciated the notion of the “carrying capacity of the earth” which is often mentioned in link with sustainable development.
Investment in local consumption is expected to create a multiplier effect which benefits the local community by creating jobs, more local spending, and in the long-term higher local per capita income (Hirrigan et al, 2002: 453). Sustainable Development Commission (2004) notes that ‘every GBP 10 spent on local food generates £25 for the local economy’ compared to the supermarket which generates only GBP 14.
Embedded technology literature review
The initial stage of the literature review from the technical embedded side of the project focused on applications of technology that help people lead more sustainable lives. Bartram et. al. (2010) have researched the use of green technologies in homes and how the residents of these homes feel about the use of this technology. The residents suggested that running their sustainable home was a considerable effort on their part, but were happy to do so to help ensure sustainability. The people who lived in these smart homes described how they liked to show the houses off to visitors who then became more interested in the notion of a sustainable house. This resonated with how the group felt we should tackle our problem of ensuring sustainability. We believed that in order to help ensure sustainability, the group needed to approach and work with the people willing to spend time working on living in a sustainable manner. This linked back to the research we had done regarding Manzini’s Creative Communities (Manzini, 2008), the intuition here was if we could engage with the people willing to become sustainable and help them, then our system’s use would spread throughout the community, thus having a stronger impact.
