Conflicting Messages From Weak and Strong Sustainability Metrics

ABSTRACT Weak and strong sustainability represent two opposing ways of understanding sustainability. This is reflected in the metrics used to monitor both types of sustainability, where the former favours monetary aggregates of manufactured, human, and natural capital, while the latter favours biophysical indicators. A comparison of the outcomes of weak and strong sustainability metrics leads to conflicting messages between the two paradigms when assessing sustainability status and trends. Weak sustainability metrics downplay the relevance of environmental degradation, arguing that in most countries economic development is sustainable or close to being sustainable. In contrast, strong sustainability metrics argue that the world and the vast majority of nations are unsustainable. There are, however, possibilities for creating shared narratives in which the biophysical insights provided by strong sustainability metrics are complemented with those from weak sustainability metrics. From this, we also identify opportunities to move towards more meaningful sustainability narratives that combine both perspectives.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sustainable Development
Published
2026-03-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.70908
Primary Topic
Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Conflicting Messages From Weak and Strong Sustainability Metrics

Miroslav Syrovátka, Arkaitz Usubiaga‐Liaño, Paul Ekins, Tadhg O'Mahony
Sustainable Development
Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy
article

Conflicting Messages From Weak and Strong Sustainability Metrics

Miroslav Syrovátka, Arkaitz Usubiaga‐Liaño, Paul Ekins, Tadhg O'Mahony
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Weak and strong sustainability represent two opposing ways of understanding sustainability. This is reflected in the metrics used to monitor both types of sustainability, where the former favours monetary aggregates of manufactured, human, and natural capital, while the latter favours biophysical indicators. A comparison of the outcomes of weak and strong sustainability metrics leads to conflicting messages between the two paradigms when assessing sustainability status and trends. Weak sustainability metrics downplay the relevance of environmental degradation, arguing that in most countries economic development is sustainable or close to being sustainable. In contrast, strong sustainability metrics argue that the world and the vast majority of nations are unsustainable. There are, however, possibilities for creating shared narratives in which the biophysical insights provided by strong sustainability metrics are complemented with those from weak sustainability metrics. From this, we also identify opportunities to move towards more meaningful sustainability narratives that combine both perspectives.

Sustainable Development
University College Dublin (IE), Ikerbasque (ES), Research Council of Finland (FI), University of Turku (FI), Turku Centre for Computer Science (FI), Basque Centre for Climate Change (ES), Centre for Sustainable Energy (GB), University College London (GB), Palacký University Olomouc (CZ)
Openalex Percentile: Top 37%
Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.