Filtering by
- Creators: Department of Psychology
Brundtland’s definition of sustainability is the ability to “meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs” (IISD, 2021). But what if there are no future generations? Social sustainability, the sector of sustainability that foregrounds the well-being and livelihoods of people (and thereby continuation of humanity), is included in definitions within the sustainability field, but less developed in sustainability practice. In an effort to bridge this gap of knowledge, 14 U.S. cities and over 100 sustainability policies were analyzed for their social sustainability performance. An eight-item analytical framework that deals with differing areas of social equity guided the analysis. Results found that most cities’ sustainability departments fell short of truly addressing social sustainability concerns. Out of the eight items, the most frequently addressed were housing security and racial and gender equality whereas few, if any, cities addressed the more specific social concerns of immigration, technology and media, or arts/cultural preservation. Future research is recommended to gain a better understanding of the ways existing cities can improve in this area.
and these exchanges may be critical for achieving evolutionary goals, such as reproduction.
Depending on their reputation, an individual may or may not gain access to resources in order to
achieve their evolutionary goals. Reputation is typically described as being “positive” and
“negative,” but the current study aimed to identify potential nuances to reputations beyond the
traditional dichotomy. It was hypothesized that different types of reputations (such as “friendly”,
“dishonest”, and “aggressive”) would group together in categories beyond “positive” and
“negative.” Additionally, individuals with different life history strategies might find different
reputations important, because the reputations they find most important may help them get the
kinds of resources they need to attain their specific evolutionary goals. Therefore, it was also
predicted that the importance individuals place on different types of reputations would vary as a
function of life history strategy. Exploratory factor analysis identified a five factor structure for
reputations. Individuals also placed varying levels of importance on different types of
reputations, and found some reputations more important than others depending on their life
history strategy. This study demonstrates that reputational information is more nuanced than
previously thought and future research should consider that there may be more than just
“positive” and “negative” reputations in social interactions.