Introduction to the special issue on social sustainability: integration, context, and governance

Since the late 1980s, the pursuit of sustainability as a practical effort, rather than as a purely scientific or descriptive concept, has recognized the importance of balancing the competing priorities of environmental protection, economic growth, and social equity. We now know that we cannot make meaningful progress resolving issues like climate change and the degradation of global ecosystems without also addressing associated economic and social equity concerns. As part of this realization, scholars and practitioners in diverse disciplines have adopted a "triple-bottom line" or "three pillars" approach as an expedient heuristic that understands sustainability, or sustainable development, as achieving some balance among environmental, economic, and social equity priorities, all at once. Over time, however, decision makers have earned criticism for using this triad of objectives as a policy inventory rather than a model for examining the relationships and interdependencies among environmental, economic, and social priorities in diverse places (see, in particular, Bostrom, 2012). Some scholars, coming to the issue from a range of disciplines, have attempted to address the short-comings of the three-pillar model by adding more pillars (e.g., Godschalk, 2004; Bendell & Kearins, 2005; Inayatullah, 2005; Seghezzo, 2009). However, the challenge remains that forcing complex and unprecedented socio-environmental problems into three, four, or seven distinct containers represents an outdated, unduly modernist way of problem-solving that tends to approach environmental, economic, and social issues as independent, and consequently, their solutions as separate (Vanclay, 2004; Milne & Gray, 2013).New research and practice in sustainability proposes an integrated concept whereby "social issues" are indistinguishable and inseparable from economic or environmental issues and vice versa. These approaches are based in experiences with real places and real people, pertaining to, as Krueger & Agyeman (2005) contend, "actual existing sustainabilities." The articles in this special issue extend the effort to envision a deeply integrated approach to sustainability by rooting their analyses in local places and actual people, highlighting the importance of grounded perspectives, collaborative processes, and engaged governance that address multiple issues at once and challenge the customary multi-pillar model. While these are not new concerns in sustainability circles (see Bostrom, 2012; Murphy, 2012), the authors of the work presented here argue concretely for the interconnections among these elements and suggest specific ways that they can be better included in sustainability efforts.Together, these articles suggest that an integrated approach to sustainability can be envisioned and enacted through specific kinds of governance and educational activities that encourage cooperative processes and attention to local experiences. All of the authors find separation of the economic, environmental, and social dimensions of sustainability to be superficial and impractical for communities that must reconcile these objectives every day, and they prefer instead to address overarching concerns in terms of well-being, livability, security, equity, and community engagement. For example, Malena Serrano and her colleagues assess their experiences sharing earthquake resistant building techniques in Peru and argue that integrated sustainability recognizes the need to incorporate local perspectives and values into processes of technology transfer and to account for the connections between degraded environments and social inequalities. They furthermore argue that construction techniques are deeply connected to ideas of well-being and acceptable living spaces.The notion of well-being for effective sustainability efforts is crucial for several other authors. Sandra Santa Cruz et al. discuss the importance of security and basic services through their case study of earthquake-risk mitigation in schools in Peru concluding that both social equity and community are crucial to building sustainable resilience to hazards; ensuring student physical, psychological, and social well-being; and providing environmental and economic benefits. …