Towards fair and sustainable practices
The Council for the Environment and Infrastructure recently published its report “Fair sustainability”. The Council investigated the pros and cons of sustainability and how citizens view these issues. The main conclusion is that many people consider sustainability policy to be unfair, and that this is a significant reason why sustainability in the Netherlands is not progressing as well as desired in order to achieve the sustainability goals that have been set nationally. The Rli argues that sustainability requires everyone who is able to do so to participate and therefore make an effort to help achieve the sustainability goals, but that this is not happening to a sufficient extent. In addition, the Council notes that this is reducing support for policy, at the risk of making it impossible for society to successfully become more sustainable.
The council's research shows that government policy often tends to increase social inequality, which in turn reduces people's trust in the government. The government then fails to sufficiently recognize that its policies affect people unequally in their efforts to lead dignified and valuable lives. It also does not make sufficient efforts to encourage those who are capable of doing so on their own to take action. (The use of words such as “encourage” or “compel” was probably a bridge too far in the text for the council...) The Rli therefore advises the government and social partners to structurally link sustainability with justice, to ensure that everyone can participate and to strive to ensure that everyone who is able to do so does participate.
This report is consistent with the insights we gained in the Just Prepare project, as well as in the Social Sustainability learning workshop of the Arnhem and Nijmegen Social Domain Workshop (WSDAN), for the following reasons.
First of all, the report explicitly assumes that justice in sustainability has various aspects and therefore does not only relate to the distribution of the benefits and burdens of sustainability measures (distributive justice), but also to the extent to which people are involved in the processes through which sustainability is achieved (procedural justice) and the extent to which their perspective is actually taken seriously (recognition justice). This has long been known in the literature as the so-called tenet approach to justice, but we see in practice, including within Just Prepare, that such a multifaceted view of justice is not a piece of cake for local networks of partners involved in neighborhood-oriented energy transition.
If we fail to consider the consequences of policy for people, then it simply won't work.
In addition, this report comes from a very influential and important advisory body, which represents societal recognition of the proposition that sustainability transitions are actually social transitions. Not so long ago, we heard a huge emphasis in the field on the technical and technological aspects of sustainability—the idea that we can achieve sustainability transitions with more and better technology—and that people should simply trust that technology—“they should just do what we tell them.” However, this report clearly shows that there are various reasons why we need to talk to each other about what that technology and those policies actually aim to achieve, what consequences they have for people's lives, and whether we actually want that. It also shows what fair alternatives actually entail. In other words, this report states in black and white that a democratic and therefore social approach to sustainability transitions is the only way to bring about real change. And certainly, technology plays a role in this, but if we fail to consider the consequences of policies and measures for people, especially those who are already struggling with limited opportunities to lead a dignified and valuable life, then it simply will not work. We at Just Prepare and the WSDAN have been arguing this, with good reason, for years, and this report gives us an additional (authoritative) argument in our work as social scientists in the energy transition.
Thirdly, this report indirectly points to a deeper issue, namely that we perhaps need to become and remain more aware that the transformation to a sustainable society is a collective task. This is difficult to keep in mind in all the situations you encounter as a professional or citizen, because all the indicators point in the direction we have been heading for the past decades: you as an individual are responsible for your own happiness and well-being, and in exchange you are given the freedom to shape that yourself without having to worry too much about others, because they are also responsible for themselves. Justice, and now clearly also fair sustainability, requires above all that we show solidarity with others who are unable to keep up on their own and that those who are able to do so, and possibly also bear part of the burden for others, do so. But this also means that the principle of the strongest shoulders carrying the heaviest burdens does not deprive the owners of weaker shoulders of their rights to contribute ideas and determine what we want to achieve together. Unfortunately, this seems to be all too common at the moment.
Fortunately, however, the council ultimately outlines a way forward in which governments can at least take a leading role. All those professionals, volunteers, civil servants, researchers, and others who work in or with organizations involved in sustainability transitions find themselves in situations where justice is at stake. Sometimes they recognize this, sometimes they do not. Even if they do recognize it and are aware of issues of justice, they do not always know how to act to prevent or counteract unjust consequences for citizens. What is needed at present is to give professionals a helping hand in this regard. The Rli makes a number of concrete suggestions for this, such as appointing a justice coach within municipalities or making it standard practice to draw up a justice report as a quality criterion for government policy documents. But within Just Prepare and the WSDAN, we are also working on ways (such as tools, learning materials, methodologies, sharing inspiring examples) to increase the capacity for action of everyone involved in sustainability transitions.
Because that is what society needs now in terms of equitable sustainability: that we collectively take the step from knowledge to wisdom. And that, based on our knowledge, we are able to take equitable and effective action.
Werkpakket Leider WP 5 en Lector bij HAN University of Applied Sciences
EN 
NL 