Evaluating Sustainability

Evaluate: presenting and defending opinions by making judgments about information, validity of ideas or quality of work based on a set of criteria.

What is a criteria?
A criteria is a set of standards that you use to judge something. For example, you would refer to the criteria to decide how successful the management strategies have been.

An evaluation of sustainability strategies could use a range of criteria to make a judgement.

What type of criteria are there and what do they mean?
What do the criteria mean?

Criteria - Principles of Sustainability

The principles of sustainability can be used as criteria to evaluate a sustainability strategy.
​The principles are; precautionary approach, intergenerational equity, conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity.
Precautionary Principle
  • ​Has the ecosystem become more or less susceptible to human or natural
  • stress?
  • Are there attempts to improve knowledge of the threats to
  • the ecosystem?
  • Do management strategies take into account best and worst
  • case scenarios for threats to the ecosystem?
  • Are historical processes maintained (e.g. the ability to adapt to changes)?
Intergenerational Equity
  • Is the use and management of the ecosystem maintaining the quality of the ecosystem for the future? ·        
  • Will people in the future be able to access various parts of the ecosystem?
  • Will people in the future be able to use the resources of the ecosystem?
  • Is the current population able to benefit from the ecosystem’s
  • aesthetic values (the way the ecosystem looks)?
Conservation of biological diversity
  • ​What changes have taken place within food webs/chains?
  • Are there still as many links within the chains and webs?
  • Has the diversity of the ecosystem been diminished in any way?
  • Is genetic diversity maintained?
  • Has there been a reduction or increase of any species? What impact will this have?
  • Is the ecosystem still functioning effectively in terms of biological processes, etc?
Ecological integrity
  • Does the strategy prioritise the preservation of biodiversity and the protection of natural ecosystems?
  • Is the strategy designed to minimise long-term environmental degradation, such as soil erosion, habitat destruction, or water pollution?
  • Does the strategy ensure the capacity of ecosystems to regenerate and maintain ecological functions?
  • Does the strategy allow modifications to respond to ecological changes and unforeseen environmental impacts?
  • ​How does the strategy promote the restoration or rehabilitation of degraded ecosystems, and does it include provisions for long-term ecological resilience?

Criteria - Pillars of Sustainability

Environmental
  • Is the preservation of biodiversity prioritised?
  • Are the preservation of natural ecosystems prioritised?
  • Is long-term environmental degradation minimised?
  • Is the capacity of ecosystem regeneration to maintenance of ecological functions addressed?
  • Is ecosystem restoration/rehabilitation included/promoted?
Cultural
  • Are cultural heritage, language, traditional and practices preserved?
  • Are cultural knowledge and practices, including TEK, shared and passed down?
  • Are cultural diversity, creativity, and the arts encouraged?
Economic
  • Is long-term economic growth fostered?
  • Are a range of job opportunities created?
  • Does the strategy contribute to sustainable livelihoods?
  • Does the strategy build economic resilience?
Social
  • Does the strategy promote equality and fairness for social groups, including the marginalised and vulnerable?
  • Is community engagement and participation supported?
  • Are local cultural practices, and traditions fostered?
  • Are well-being and quality of life enhanced?

Language Use

In response to a question about a sustainability strategy, you will need to describe the sustainability strategy, and make a judgement about how effective it is. Use terms such as totally unsustainable, somewhat unsustainable, moderately sustainable, etc. 
Extremely unsustainable:
Unsuccessful, unproductive, impractical, useless, fruitless, inadequate, unworkable, ineffective, counterproductive, unfeasible, short-sighted, damaging, detrimental, wasteful, unsuitable, irrelevant, unrealistic, unviable, incompatible, flawed, destructive, unstable, unbalanced, unscalable...

Unsustainable/Somewhat unsustainable:
Inefficient, impractical, limited, suboptimal, problematic, infeasible, unsuitable, unrealistic, unstable, deficient, uneconomical, unproductive, disadvantageous, unbalanced, weak, lacklustre, flawed, unfit, fragile, non-viable, disruptive, wasteful...

Moderately sustainable:
Successful, productive, practical, useful, fruitful, adequate, workable...

Sustainable/Somewhat sustainable:
Effective, viable, practical, resilient, balanced, efficient, reliable, feasible, adaptable, resource-efficient, equitable, responsible, optimised, stable, appropriate, durable, ethical, well-integrated, low-impact, economically viable, environmentally sound, scalable...

Extremely sustainable:
Highly effective, resilient, transformative, long-lasting, self-sustaining, environmentally restorative, thriving, regenerative, innovative, optimal, robust, equitable, scalable, forward-thinking, durable, efficient...