ABSTRACT
The various dimensions of sustainability (ecological, economic, social), although closely interconnected, often compete with one another and cannot be easily reconciled. There is a complex transdisciplinary discussion on the right balance between the dimensions to achieve justice (see Kreibich, 1996): Should the ecological dimension be given priority? Or should all three dimensions be weighted equally? To what extent can economic welfare be achieved without putting ecological aims at risk? In the literature, only a few examples are reported where a balance between the three dimensions was explicitly sought. One of these examples includes an ecological village with about 30 households, where sustainable lifestyles were established bringing together ecological, social, and economic aims (Kirby, 2003). Summing up, sustainability is a “fuzzy set” (Linneweber, 1998, p. 66) that leaves room for interpretation. Sustainable development is always the product of weighing competing aims and values against another. A justice perspective can offer a theoretical framework to this discourse by constructing ecological conflicts as conflicts of justice (Montada, 2007; Müller, 2012) that also concern the justice for future generations (Gethmann, 2008). Therefore, the concept of sustainability does not imply that there are “easy” technological solutions to the interlocking social, ecological, and economic problems. Rather, it shows that the greatest challenge of modern societies is to develop cultures of discourse, to find ways to consider the many issues involved, to respect the interests of stakeholders as well as the rights of nature. Individual competencies for conflict resolution, awareness of moral dilemmas, and a democratic culture of mutual understanding lie at the heart of an education for sustainability.
