Center for Earth Systems Engineering and Management

While the definition of sustainability remains open for all to contribute to and participate in, there do seem to be some notions it has come to embody that should not be neglected as the definition coalesces. Among these are the ethical and social dimensions of sustainability. Whether or not it is appropriate, required, or even desirable, concepts like social equity, human rights, ethical sharing of commons, etc. have increasingly come under the umbrella of the sustainability discourse. Even if “sustainability” as a bare word doesn’t imply those things, the concept of sustainable development certainly has taken on those dimensions. That sustainability might be redefined or re-scoped to be a purely environmental or a rigidly scientific endeavor, is not an immediate concern of this paper, though if that were to occur (whether for the sake of simplicity or pragmatics), it should be done explicitly so the ethical sub-discourse can be maintained (indeed, sustained) by some other movement.

This paper proposes a mechanism by which such a migration in terms can be prevented. First, in reviewing the work of Denis Goulet, it shows the solid basis for including an ethical aspect in the sustainability discourse. Second, it points out that Karl-Henrik Robèrt’s highly-lauded and broadly-employed sustainability framework, The Natural Step, is deficient in this area. This deficiency provides the impetus for, finally, proposing a mechanism by which The Natural Step can be extended to include the important social and ethical dimensions of sustainability. This mechanism is based on the capabilities approaches that, in many respects, evolved out of Goulet’s early work. Augmented accordingly, TNS can continue to be used without fear of overlooking the social and ethical aspects of the sustainability discourse.

Here I plan to use CLCA to evaluate the environmental impact (and economy by using MFA??) by changing traditional crop to AVP1 GM crop. In this study I will compare wild type (WT) and AVP1 transgenic romaine lettuce (Lactuca sativa cv. conquistador). This is a study of P fertilizer being applied on romaine lettuce from gate to grave and making a comparison between WT and AVP1 romaine lettuce. The system boundary would be commercial P fertilizers applied on all lettuce in the U.S. The lettuce includes head lettuce, leaf lettuce, and romaine lettuce. The amount of P fertilizers such as inorganic, organic, and imported, will be identified and quantified. The amount of nitrogen and potassium fertilizers will also be quantified along with P fertilizer. The amount of water will be compared between the two different lettuces as the AVP1 lettuce grows faster and the amount of days of watering would be fewer. Eutrophication will be assessed as well as N2O emission. As AVP1 lettuce has a bigger root system, I will try to quantify the extra amount of CO2 fixed into the soil via AVP1 lettuce. I will also try to project the impact of AVP1 lettuce on market price. The functional unit of LCA portion is kg usage of N and P2O5 per ton of lettuce and the functional unit of MFA is kg/ha.