From Valuing Nature to Reclaiming Resources: Applications
1. Imaging the “slow” Anthropocene
(i.e. the cultural acceptance principle)
The exercise, carried out in preparation for the “Valuing Nature” session, also provided contextualization for the Berlin case study. The triple-principle frame (social justice, environmental responsibility, and cultural acceptance) was used as a reference. The idea consisted of simulating possible trajectories of societal change by imagining strong sustainabilityoptions leading to socio-ecosystemic resilience, i.e. more frugal, self-supporting societies. Ultimately, this approach allows one to anticipate the societal and ecological transition costs of a zero-debt society (economic, social, environmental, educational, etc.) as an aid to decision-making. Two hypotheses were considered that state:
Hypothesis 1:
∑R (available resources) = vital needs + wants (resources could cover both needs and wants; carrying capacity at equilibrium).
Hypothesis 2:
(vital needs + wants) > ∑R > vital needs (carrying capacity > available resources).
A development model based on zero socio-ecosystemic debt was suggested in order to systematically:
- Internalize the socio-ecosystemic negative externalities (no dumping);
- Adjust resources to comply with the vital/fundamental needs of individuals.
To this end, it appeared necessary to reconfigure institutions ensuring legitimate, transparent, equitable access to resources and to design instruments and norms for social justice (such as equitable access to resources, limiting the use of private property to encourage better use of the commons), and environmental responsibility (including policies on price, taxation, and subsidies).
2. The Berlin case study
The idea was to work with Berlin-based actors in order to understand how the society had engaged with the transition process. Actors were identified from among academic, institutional, and civil societal groups.
2.1. Cross-sector environmental issues and strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)
Technische Universität (TU) Berlin, Environmental Assessment and Planning Research Group, headed by Professor Johann Köppel, with Gesa Geissler contributing to the session.
- Regulatory planning and decision-making processes need to consider earlier information about environmental impacts and resource use, and better integrate public participation.1
Expertise:- Environmental planning in Berlin (1979‒2004) (S. Pobloth);
- The role of private land acquisition in nature conservation (T. Disselhof);
- Fluxes of matter, energy, and resources (M. Stamenkovic);
- Evaluation and accounting methods in mitigation and compensation (E. Bruns);
- Putting concepts into practice: Roof Water Farm (RWF) project, model areas/neighborhoods, with Grit Bürgow contributing to the session.
2.2. Control instruments for integrating the economic, ecological, and social dimensions of sustainability (mechanisms of vertical and horizontal integration of sustainability)
- Freie Universität Berlin, Environmental Policy Research Center (FFU), Director Dr. Klaus Jacob, Otto Suhr Institute of Political Sciences (Berlin School of Environmental Policy Analysis).
- Friends of the Earth (BUND), Berlin, with Herbert Lohner contributing to the session.
Expertise:- Goals and priorities of resources efficiency/productivity;
- Robust mechanisms for effective sustainability strategies to achieve sustainable development targets.
- Distribution effects of environmental policies.
2.3. Sources of information produced by decision-making actors
The Senate Department for Urban Development and the Environment, Berlin, provides a lot of information in German and English translation:
- Berlin Environmental Atlas;
- Berlin Climate Protection Council (mostly scientists);
- Agenda 21: preparing Berlin for a Sustainable Future;
- Berlin 21: an association promoting Agenda 21 (in German).
The exercise questioned the values guiding actions in Berlin, the assessment and validation instruments, the main sources of data (such as the Berlin Environmental Atlas), indicators, and tools subtending co-design and co-construction experimentations towards strong sustainability.
We learned that Berlin has played a pivotal role in the emergence of urban ecology.2 Starting with the Nature Conservation Act 1979, the Berlin Senate has implemented measures of compensation and substitution for all developmental projects. The historical tendency from inception to the present mitigation policies was the “constant drift from the restriction of developmental projects to a flexible compensation only loosely connected with the original policy.”3 The erosion of the regulation by flexibilization was aggravated further by a lack of implementation of the regulations. Altogether, the norm has shifted from biotope protection to re-creative planning and simple substitution measures such as planting trees and greening roofs. The main argument was “lack of space” and the contextual interpretation and negotiation of the provision of the impact regulations.
