1° How do the different sciences (e.g. Social, Engineering, Earth Sciences) approach the question of sustainability? Are there important differences between these approaches?
Do the Social Sciences have a unanimous and universal vision of sustainability or should we distinguish Economics (and their approach in terms of weak and strong sustainability) from other Social Sciences (human geography, communication sciences, sociology, anthropology, etc.). This first theme aims to propose a collection of representations of sustainability and to initiate debates around an interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary approach to sustainability.
2° What are the dimensions, topics, and themes that are part of or, on the contrary, escape the discourse on sustainability?
This second theme centers around new (sub-)fields of sustainability (e.g. urban agriculture, sustainable cities, education for sustainability, sustainable mobility, gender, etc.) or measures (e.g. universal income, complementary currencies, zero unemployment territories, etc.). Do they (consciously?) contribute to a strong sustainability paradigm or rather try to escape the discourse by focusing on practical implementation and implications? And why and how do the researchers and practitioners do this?
3° Which are the paradigms embodying the idea of strong sustainability today?
By paradigm, we mean a representation of the world or a way of understanding things based on a disciplinary matrix, a theoretical model, a current of thought, or even a set of citizen practices. How does a strong sustainability paradigm relate to alternative paradigms, such as Social and Solidarity Economy, Collaborative Economy, Economy of sharing, Ecodevelopment, Degrowth, Complexity theory, Buen vivir, Ecological Economics, Political Ecology, Industrial Ecology, Bioeconomy, Bio-based Economy, and many more. Or can we still understand strong sustainability as a simple return to the ideology of growth and technological progress? How does strong sustainability relate to utopian and dystopian images, narratives, or ideologies?
4° Which models, methods and scientific tools consider strong sustainability?
Many tools are used in sustainability research sustainability, e.g. Life Cycle Analysis, Material Flow Analysis, Input-Output Analysis, Circles of Sustainability, System Dynamics modelling, complex systems, etc. Tools differ greatly between fields from engineering to social sciences. Some modelling approaches such as Integrated Assessment Models (IAM) integrate energy, economic, climate and environmental issues and project long-term scenarios to suggest mitigation/adaptation strategies to policy makers. How do these tools fit (or not) into a strong sustainability framework?
5° Which future scenarios embody the idea of strong sustainability the most?
Should scenarios such as green growth, steady state, degrowth or collapse be seen as ways of thinking (or not) about sustainability? In how far do the Shared Socio-economic Pathways (SSPs) fit within a stong sustainability paradigm? What place should we give to utopian scenarios (e.g. 100% renewable energies), pragmatic scenarios (e.g. the energy mix) and transition scenarios? Does the idea of transition move us away from a strong sustainability scheme? Can/should it even be seen as an abuse of weakness, distilled by lobbyists that are not ready to make the radical changes necessary to move towards a better life society.
6° How to finance strong sustainability?
If governments and major international institutions are investing in renewable energies, organic farming, positive energy buildings and sustainable mobility, the question arises today as to how to finance these actions and strategies. Taxes and subsidies, public spending (at local, national or European level), the reform of financial markets or the implementation of an active monetary policy could all be tools that commit our societies to greater sustainability.
7° How to assess sustainability?
A sustainability assessment raises a set of questions and issues: What can be assessed (in terms of sustainability objectives)? Who can evaluate (in the sense of expertise)? How to evaluate (in terms of procedures, methods and indicators)?
