Sustainability, the capital approach and the built environment

Atkinson, G (2008) Sustainability, the capital approach and the built environment. Building Research & Information, 36(3), pp. 241-247. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

Sustainable development is concerned with how current decisions about how to manage a portfolio of wealth - comprising all of the assets in an economy including natural wealth - have an impact upon future well-being. Contributions to this debate based on the link between asset accounting and indicators of sustainable development are reviewed. This 'capital approach' focuses on wealth accounting and indicators of genuine (or adjusted net) saving, the amount of saving over and above the value of total asset consumption. If the genuine saving rate is negative, it provides an indication that current behaviour is eroding the capital on which its development depends. Such empirical discussion about the sustainability of development paths is typically concerned with assessing whether national economies are sustainable. However, as demonstrated, for example, by Pearce in 2003, these insights and the indicators that follow are also relevant for discussions about the contribution of economic sectors such as construction and the built environment to sustainability. This provides a useful addition to existing approaches (such as those based on a 'triple-bottom line'). The paper concludes with some thoughts about how the capital (or wealth-accounting) approach could be extended to gain further insight into the contribution of the built environment to sustainability.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: built environment; capital theory; development theory; economic value; natural capital; sustainability; wealth accounting; well-being
Index terms: consumption, accounting, development theory, well-being, national economy, built environment, sustainable development
Subjects: consumer economics, mental health and wellbeing, socioeconomic concepts, economic analysis, health safety and environment, infrastructure and transport systems
Topics: Governance, Stakeholder Management, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Urban Studies
Descriptive scope: 2 CT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here