Implementation of Sustainable Development: the Impact of Social

Sustainability

Tunmise, Ayodele T.T1 and Abimbola, Ogunlola A.A

2

1Leicester school of Architecture, De Montfort University, United Kingdom.

2Department of Architecture, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile Ife Nigeria.

Abstract. Sustainability having gained momentum over the years has been adopted as a global agenda for

all developments, because of the impact of human activities on the environment. So, is it all about the

environment? The social dimension also aimed at assuming certain needs of people globally. Nevertheless,

limited research work has been done on the subject. This study is a precedence to subsequent studies. It is a

review of some theoretical investigations on the impact of social sustainability in the implementation of

sustainable development, and a case of Nigeria and United Kingdom are presented for comparison. Research

efforts in existing literatures are presented and the theoretical investigation suggests a visible impact of social

sustainability. It also identifies the need for further research and awareness on the subject matter for all

stakeholders to promote social sustainability in the built environment.

Keywords: social sustainability, sustainability, sustainable development.

1. Introduction

District six, the sixth municipal district of Cape Town was known as a community that accommodated

diverse ethnicity, freed slaves, merchants, artisans and mostly immigrants; a notable area with road networks

to urban areas and port at the inception of the twentieth century. However, the good story changed to an era

of marginalisation. The black South Africans were forcefully asked to leave the district in 1901, the

flourishing class found their way to the suburbs and the previously flourishing area became a neglected city.

In 1966 it was declared a white area under Act of 1950 (the group areas), it became a desert land as houses

were flattened by bulldozers. [1] This ugly incidence led to this statement from one of the notable proponents

of sustainable development. “Sustainability…suggests all humanity has a similar interest in ‘sustainable

housing’ or ‘sustainable urban development’; that if we simply recognized our common interests everything

would be fine, there would be an end to, ill treatment, segregation, housing problems, congestion, penury and

incessant slum. Yet social sustainability and urban development are conflict-laden areas, and this is very

evident in the case of District Six. (Lucien Le Grange, director of the School of Architecture at the

University of Cape Town). Having said this, this essay explains the concept of sustainable development,

analyse its implementation in buildings and practice. Dwelling solely on the impact of social dimension

which is believed to have been disregarded overtime, the essay demonstrates way by which stakeholders

have reacted to social sustainability while implementing sustainable development, an example in Nigeria and

United Kingdom was used for this analysis to show the impact of social sustainability of sustainable

development.

2. Robust Definition of Sustainable Development.

Sustainable development is a development which meets the needs of the present generation without

encroaching on the strength of the future generations to satisfy its own needs [2]. Sustainability is referred to

as the concept of using wisely the available natural resources avoiding depletion of such resources. This

implies that builders, architects, designers, community planners, and other stakeholders strive to create

buildings and communities that will not deplete natural resources. The goal is to meet today's needs using

renewable resources so that the needs of future generations will be provided for. Sustainable development

International Proceedings of Chemical, Biological and Environmental Engineering, Vol. 93 (2016)

DOI: 10.7763/IPCBEE. 2016. V93. 21

138

attempts to minimize greenhouse gases, reduce global warming, preserve environmental resources, and

produce communities that allow people to reach their full potentials. This phenomenon has been defined by

several authors as it expands in horizon over the years. However, the most common element of this definition

is the ability to provide for the present without compromising the standard of living for the future; the socio-

cultural needs of people is fundamental.

Social wellbeing of people has to be balanced by the conservation of environmental resources for the

benefit of future generations [3]. It could be inferred that there should be a balance between environmental

conservation and social needs while implementing sustainable development. Furthermore, [4] noted that

sustainable development means total regard for the integrity of nature as well as the needs and privileges of

present and future generations, this means developments which has their origin in socio-cultural activities

destruction should be rejected. However, it has been observed that the ethos of sustainable development has

been defined in isolation, each from its distinctive views; little efforts have been made as regard a holistic

conception. [5] The new perspective of sustainable development as a holistic vision balance changes at all

levels of environmental, economic and social view.

2.1 The Dimensions of Sustainability

The three dimensions of sustainability are very essential while defining sustainable development, as it

consist of the environmental, economic and social pillars. If any of these pillars is neglected, then the whole

system is believed to be unsustainable [6] there should be an interaction among the dimensions of

sustainability. The diagram in Fig. 1 reiterates the interaction between these dimensions.

Fig.1: Dimensions of sustainability. Source: [7]

However, it is concluded that sustainable development needs some attention and clarification as some

challenges occur in identifying sustainability in the built environment due to misconceptions as regards the

three dimensions [8]. A development is believed to be sustainable only if it satisfies all the three dimensions.

Fig. 1 above shows the interaction of the dimensions towards sustainable development. Hence, social

sustainability should not be isolated.

2.2 Social Sustainability

The social dimension of sustainability has been argued to be the most ignored of the three dimensions of

sustainability. People seem to appraise a building's performance in different ways other than this [9]. It was

concluded that this is a challenge on the growth of sustainable development as there is the difficulty in

providing ethos of sustainable development between people. It is worthy of note that there have been some

efforts to define social sustainability by mostly considering the quality of living, but it was observed that

these efforts have complicated the vagueness of social sustainability. [10] A development that enhances a

communal living is believed to be a measure for a sustainable development. Social sustainability should be

seen as a diverse phenomenon which is subject to change at any given time, its dynamism is the sole reason

why several efforts to define and explain this concept have evolved overtime by different authors. Studies

139

also observed that social sustainability is believed to have diverse requirements; as a result, requires

painstaking appraisal. [11] The study concluded that a development or building that allows social

sustainability should:

Guarantee access to local services and infrastructure

Preserve local heritage and culture of the people

Adhere to standards that are ethical and enhance economic activities, also provide a friendly and

healthy work environments.

Furtherance to an environmentally friendly building minimizing its impact on global warming,

sustainable developments expect more to be done. It was also concluded that the sense of belonging is

paramount and sustainable buildings should satisfy the following criteria:

Traditions

Human health

Social infrastructure

Participation and local democracy among others. [12]

In a research around the world, some elements referred to as key indicators for a sustainable

development were inferred and it was concluded that one of the constraints of integrating the framework of

the research is the local interpretation which is fundamental. Towards a design for social sustainability some

considerations were also noted such as:

Meeting and interaction point for people

How people move from place to place (Transportation)

How child care facilities can evolve into new builds, are as important as any other factor.

[12]

The study concluded that the overall sustainability of buildings demands economic and environmental

dimensions, but depends on well-planned social amenities with an aim of building an environment that puts

at heart a sense of belonging of the people. As long as this is not implemented, the society will be left with

no choice than to continue to bear the social burdens of its mistakes. Social sustainability is found to be of

public importance and as such a determinant for quality of life for present and future generations.

Fig. 2 below shows the illustration of design towards a socially sustainable society. Factors put into

consideration are majorly space to grow, voice and influence, social and cultural life, as well as amenities

and social infrastructure. All these factors are fundamental to providing social justice.

Fig. 2: Design for social sustainability. Source: [12]

140

However, it is believed that social sustainability has a conflicting interest with creating a city. Increasing

population and government policies in most developing countries lead to inequity and lack of social justice

as well as depletion of slums and squatters that negates the social wellbeing of people. Nevertheless, the

implementation of the concept of sustainability has suffered a setback because it has often been appraised

exclusively to the environmental dimension disregarding the social aspect. [13], the implementation of this

phenomenon fails completely if any of this dimensions is not balanced with one another in the process of

evaluation. Hence, the limitations of the implementation process have relatively been traced to the disregard

for social sustainability calling for more attention in the present day practice. Evidence from preceding

discussions have shown that sustainable development has been recently updated as more socially conscious

and relative in terms of the dimensions. Having said that, the impact of social sustainability is being analysed

below with examples comparing practice in Nigeria and United Kingdom.

3. Case study

3.1 Makoko, Lagos (Disregard for Social Sustainability)

Makoko in Lagos is an area that was considered to be 85,840 in population. Even though not officially

part of the 2007 census and the population is estimated to be higher. The area came into existence in the 18th

century and was used primarily for fishing, most of the structures in Makoko are shanty developments and

constructed on stilts above the Lagos lagoon as represented in Fig. 3 and 4 below.

Fig. 3: The lagoon in Makoko Lagos. Source; [14]

The increasing rate of socially unsustainable environments such as the Makoko area in Lagos can be

traced to the rapid urbanisation in Lagos that has increased the demand for services such as housing. The

serious challenge facing public authorities in areas like this has been traced to the inability to provide

affordable housing for the rapidly growing society. [15] Even after several attempts to cub this menace,

socially sustainable housing for the low income earners has become a dream yet to be achieved. Places such

as Makoko still lack basic amenities which is an indicator for decent living even while creating a sustainable

urban city. [15] The uneven distribution of infrastructure and social amenities among people in Lagos

brought about the emergence of slums like this, this suggests that satisfaction is a measure used to

distinguish between current and anticipated community situation. People assess their situations relative to

their needs, desires and aspirations. With all this indicators, it is believed that the inhabitants of Makoko are

unhappy with the current condition as regards the implementation of sustainable development in that area,

social dimension is found wanting in creating the city of Lagos. More emphasis has over time been laid on

environmental and economic ethos than the social ethos of sustainable development.

141

Fig. 4: Picture showing a woman doing her business on the lagoon; [14]

The oily water in Fig. 4 is what the residents of this community depend on for their way of life, this

endangers the health of the people and encourages the spread of diseases across the populace. [14] Also

worthy of note is one of the paramount ethos of social sustainability which is social justice, this is far from

the resident of this community as they recently experienced similar situation of the district six in South

Africa years back. Recently the government declared their homes illegal which made them homeless in a

quest to carry on regeneration, they were not offered an alternative settlement that could be called home.

Months later they were still found living in their boats exposed to serious dangers. Yet they carried out their

day to day activities in the situation as shown in the pictures above, definitely with little or no social

satisfaction about the implementation of sustainable development. The Makoko community in Lagos,

Nigeria is being identified as an example of the disregard for social sustainability in the implementation of

sustainable development in Nigeria.

3.2 The Empire square, London (A Regard for Social Sustainability)

The Empire square is a development at London Bridge that was built in winter 2006, it is an upscale

serviced apartments 0.2 miles from Borough tube station and 0.8 miles from Tate modern Museum and 1.3

miles from the Tower of London. It has over 277 dwelling gated development, 49 key worker apartments

(live and work), and these give appropriate room for social interaction and social justice which is an attribute

of social sustainability. Also, there is a new public garden space for social interaction. The building in

question is an epitome of sustainable development most especially as regard social sustainability. It provides

modern affordable housing and accommodation for all and sundry and possesses some amenities such as

parking, access to gym and on-site crèche. Fig. 5 shows a view of the well landscaped community. The

building had complied with social sustainability from the design process, a yearlong archaeological study on

the site had started since 2002. Several heritages including a roman stone tablet was found and it is now

replicated on the central space’s paving, addressing the conservation of cultural heritage which is an

indicator of social sustainability. According to archival record, plans were exhibited to local residents to

decide on before creating the urban life, they were solely in support of raising the quality of life of the area.

The development is notable for its awards 2007 Housing Design Awards and the 2006 House Building

Innovation Awards. In addition to the facilities, a nursery, small supermarket, restaurant, bar and gym are

within five minutes’ walk to the square. Also community facilities such as primary school and library are

equally close to these facilities. This in a great deal depicts the regard for social sustainability, social justice

and equity in the implementation of sustainable development.

However, the performance of the Empire Tower as regards social sustainability was carried out on the

building, the indicators for the social and cultural life were formed by questions that put at heart fundamental

issues within the social dimension. Presented in Fig. 6 below is a pie chat representation of the findings on

social sustainability satisfaction survey on the community.

142

Fig 5: Picture showing Empire square Source; [17]

Fig. 6: Survey of satisfaction for empire square. Source; [18]

The research indicated that residents generally identify themselves as a member of a unified community,

some local amenities provided as part of the development (gym, nursery etc.) are used by both residents and

people outside the environment perceiving all facilities as affordable. Respondents according to the graph

noted the importance of their central location and local transports link connecting them to facilities and

social amenities, as good indicator of social sustainability. Buildings that are well articulated and have regard

for social and urban feasibility such as this improve the wellbeing of the society and encourage an

environment that enhances social activities and friendship among citizens. This in no doubt gives a balance

to the other two dimensions of sustainability (economic and environmental). However, greater importance

needs to be given to the social context of a building, the consideration of the building and the immediate

environment or neighbourhood allows a cross examination of sustainability. A balanced environment, human

satisfaction and social equity should be promoted, realized and managed. [19]

4. Conclusion

Despite the impact of social sustainability in the implementation of developments globally, it is very

clear that the knowledge of it gained little momentum in many grounds. Limited laws and policies that

strictly deter contrary practices do not fully exist in many governments. It is believed that implementation of

sustainable development without the social dimension would be an effort in futility. Studies need to be

carried out to examine the level of awareness and consciousness these stakeholders and practitioners have on

the subject matter. Further studies beyond this work is recommended to provide more knowledge on the

possible impacts of social sustainability. More research work is necessary to create a model of the key

143

indicators of socially sustainable developments. Sustainable development is only attainable if social

dimension could be evenly balanced with the other two dimensions.

5. References

[1] Ademiluyi, I. a. (2010). Public housing delivery strategies in Nigeria: a historical perspective of policies and

programmes. Journal of sustainable development in Africa. 12(6): 153–161.

[2] Brundtland, gro Harlem, world commission on environment and development (1987). Our common future. Oxford

university press, New York. pp. 102

[3] Edward .b (2005) rough guide to sustainability riba enterprises, London pp3-5.Capra, f. (1991). Belonging to the

universe: explorations on the frontiers of science and spirituality. San Francisco, CA: harper

[4] Yanarella, e., and Bartilow, h. (2000) dreams of sustainability; beyond the antinomies of the global sustainability

debate. International journal of sustainable development. 3(4): 370-389.

[5] Cuello .c.n (1997) towards a holistic approach to the idea of sustainability Phil & tech 2.2 winter.

[6] Woodcraft, s, bacon, n, Hackett, t, Caistor-arendar, l. (2012). Design for social sustainability. Social life/young

foundation, London. Available at http://sociallife.co/media/files/dfss_2nd_ed_for_online.pdf

[7] www.wikipedia.com

[8] Basiago, a.d (1995). Methods of defining sustainability, sustainable development. 3(3): 155-162.Commission for

architecture and built environment (2011)

[9] Dempsey, n., Bramley, g., Power, s., and Brown, c. (2011). The social dimension of sustainable development:

defining urban social sustainability. Sustainable develop, ENT, 19(5): 295-300.

[10] Vallance, s, Perkins, h.c, and Dixon, j.e (2011). What is social sustainability? A clarification of concepts.

Geoforum, 42(3): 342-348.

[11] Chiu, R. L. H. (2003) Social Sustainability, sustainable development and housing development: The experience of

Hong Kong. I FORREST, R. & LEE, J. (Eds.) Housing and social change: East-west perspectives. Rutledge.

[12] www.youngfoundation.org

[13] Hueting, r., and Reijnders, l. (2004). Broad sustainability contra sustainability; the proper construction of

sustainability indicators. Ecological economics. 50(3-4): 294-260.

[14] www.citylab.com

[15] Muhammad, m. & bichi, a. m. (2014). Constraints and challenges on housing provision in Kano city, Nigeria.

International journal of advancements in research & technology, 3 (6): 4–23.

[16] www.dailymail.co.uk

[17] www.berkeleygroup.co.uk

[18] Martens, p (2006). Sustainability, science or fiction? Sustainability science practice and policy. 2(1): 36-41.

144