We need to ensure ecological sustainability if we are to achieve social sustainability; but if we if systematically undermine our social sustainability, it doesn't really matter if we achieve ecological sustainability (in terms of creating a sustainable human society; I'd argue it still matters given the inherent value living systems, human or not). Running the Death Star on solar power doesn't do much to help the light side.
![]() |
| Photo credit: Stéfan Le Dû |
Wal-Mart has great "sustainability" goals - and due to its sheer size and influence, has done an incredible amount to drive positive ecological solutions - but their sustainability goals are environmental, and don't sufficiently integrate social impacts. A concerted effort on social sustainability by Wal-Mart - supporting fair labor practices, fair trade practices, healthy living products, and local economies - could have a huge positive impact globally, much the same way their environmental goals are. I'm not convinced the big-box business model could ever be truly sustainable without a radical rethinking, but I certainly commend their efforts to move that direction. I hope they continue to do so, and focus more on social sustainability. Hopefully this class action suit will help make that happen.
Stay going.
Tweet

We tackled the Walmart conundrum in The Natural Step Stepping Stones newsletter last year, as well...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.thenaturalstep.org/en/usa/walmart-living-better-saving
Geoff
nice post. what you doing up at 6am?
ReplyDelete