Sustainable infrastructure: who do we build infrastructure for?

Sustainability is, in itself, a relatively simple concept. Human beings have always instinctively understood it. The conventional interpretation of what it means in practical terms, as sustainable development, was first articulated in the Brundtland Commission's report Our Common Future (WCED, 1987). The commission defined sustainable development as ‘development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.’

Despite being such a simple concept, it is often misrepresented. The popular impression of sustainability and sustainable living was associated with alternative lifestyles until this century. It wasn't taken seriously by the mainstream of the design and planning professions, who often saw it as an added cost to projects for an intangible benefit. Christof Miska et al. (2018) argue that the adoption of sustainability and sustainable practices reflects corporate or institutional culture. It may seem obvious from today's perspective, but it does explain why many developments in this century have proclaimed accredited sustainable characteristics while not being sustainable. The rising demand among activist shareholders and voters for a more environmentally responsible and ethical approach has developed corporate social responsibility (CSR) accountability into greater environmental, social and governance (ESG) measurement and reporting. There was a growing expectation for corporations and governments to show that they are responsible citizens, and ESG criteria offer a way of demonstrating that. Wary of the perceived increase in cost that sustainability might represent, checklists became a popular way of calculating which measures were worth incorporating to demonstrate a sustainable approach.