Next Article in Journal
Managing Cuscuta gronovii (Swamp Dodder) in Cranberry Requires an Integrated Approach
Next Article in Special Issue
Science, Open Communication and Sustainable Development
Previous Article in Journal
Feasibility Analysis of Sustainability-Based Measures to Reduce VOC Emissions in Office Partition Manufacturing
Previous Article in Special Issue
Is Globalisation Sustainable?
Article Menu

Article Versions

Export Article

Open AccessReview
Sustainability 2010, 2(2), 645-659; doi:10.3390/su2020645

The Rhetoric of Sustainability: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy?

Urban Studies Program, Simon Fraser University, 2nd Floor, 515 W. Hastings Street, Vancouver, BC, V6B 5K3, Canada
Received: 30 December 2009 / Accepted: 9 February 2010 / Published: 22 February 2010
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Forum for Sustainable Development)
Download PDF [227 KB, uploaded 24 February 2015]

Abstract

In 1991, development economist and American public intellectual Albert O. Hirschman wrote the Rhetoric of Reaction [1]. In this book, which was prescient of more contemporary popular books such as Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine [2] and James C. Scott’s Seeing Like a State [3], Hirschman proposed a way to understand the kinds of arguments made by conservatives about proposals for change. His compelling trilogy of modes of arguments included arguments of perversity, futility, and jeopardy. I argue here that this schema can additionally be used as a way to understand the limits that are seen to exist to approaching sustainable development. I will demonstrate the pervasiveness of arguments that our best attempts to move toward sustainability in our cities today may present threats that are just as grave as those of not acting. This exercise serves two purposes. One is to urge those who would call themselves sustainability scholars to think critically and carefully about the lines of thought and action that may separate different sustainability motivations from the far reaches of interdisciplinary work in this field. The other is to suggest that, because of the persistence of certain kinds of arguments about the impossibility of sustainability, suggestive of deep and enduring instincts of doubt through human history, we should be skeptical of the legitimacy of these claims about the limitations of achieving sustainable development.
Keywords: sustainable development; Albert O. Hirschman; pragmatism; planning; social change sustainable development; Albert O. Hirschman; pragmatism; planning; social change
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 3.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Holden, M. The Rhetoric of Sustainability: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy? Sustainability 2010, 2, 645-659.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Sustainability EISSN 2071-1050 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top