Conclusions
The built environment as a whole has a substantial environmental impact that could deliver significant impacts on mitigating climate change. However, as a sector, what do we believe? And, do we collectively, have the strength of belief to deliver the changes needed to make an impact? There is a spectrum of thought within the paradigm of sustainability, ranging from Transpersonal, Deep and Moderate Ecology falling within an Ecocentric school of thought. Their worldview is contrasted to an Anthropocentric / Technocentric worldview, which embraces Accommodating Environmentalism and Cornucopian Environmentalism. The key issues are discussed in the literature review and summarised in table 1. The danger is, that we think we are all talking the same language, with the same understanding of issues and solutions. This is clearly not the case and to be expected to some extent, however the consequences are potentially dire, and we need to understand our different standpoints more objectively. The consequence of not having this deeper conceptual understanding is that opportunities for effective action will be missed. This research explored the conceptual understanding within a small sample of built environment professions. In answer to the question( a) what is the conceptual understanding of sustainability within built environment professionals, it is shown that there is a broad spectrum of views expressed from Ecocentrism to Anthropocentric / Technocentrism that need to be acknowledged and taken into account, where possible and relevant. The issues are complex, and as the result show, there is little consistency and awareness of conceptual understanding amongst built environment professionals. Within the grouping academics were found to adopt views that lead to strong sustainability. Whist some would argue that this position reflects a disconnect between the real world and the ivory towers of academia, we can see it also as‘ a call to arms’, as the opportunity to educate and inform the conceptual understanding of future generations of built environment professionals rests in our hands. Firstly though, we must inform ourselves of this discourse, and of the different philosophical positions within the spectrum of sustainability for a deeper and more fully informed conceptual understanding. The second question asked( b), what is the implication of this level of conceptual understanding with regards to delivering sustainability? The implications are clear; inaction and indecision are not sufficient, weak levels of action are also inadequate. It is clear that the degree of‘ sustainability’ embedded within some concepts, those of Cornucopian Environmentalism particularly are weak and very questionable. As a sector we need to engage in this debate explicitly and consciously. After all, the planet depends on it.
References
Brown, C. S.( 1995).“ Anthropocentrism and ecocentrism: The quest for a new worldview.” The Midwest Quarterly; 36( 2): 191
Bryman, A.( 2012). Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cook & Golton, 1994 Sustainable Development concepts and practice in the built environment. A UK perspective. CIB TG 16, Sustainable Construction. Tampa Florida, USA. November 6-9th 1994.
Cooper, I. 1994. Sustainability – Broadening the Perspectives, Cities and Sustainability, Science and Engineering Research Council, 9-13.
DirectGov. 2012. http:// www. direct. gov. uk / en / HomeAndCommunity / BuyingAndSellingYourHome / Energyperformancecertificates / DG _ 177026.( accessed 1st March 2012).
Dobson, A. 1990. Green Political Thought: An Introduction. Routledge, London. Elkington, J.( 1997) Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Eichholtz, P., Kok, N., and Quigley, J. M.( 2009),“ Doing well by doing good? An analysis of the financial; performance pf
72 ZEMCH 2015 | International Conference | Bari- Lecce, Italy