New perspectives on sustainable development and barriers to relevant information

Sustainable development may mean different things to people with different worldviews. We sketch four worldviews, drawing on a schema developed by Bryan Norton. Of these four worldviews, i.e. exploitist, utilitist, integrist and inherentist, the third is the most consistent with the Brundtland Report (WCED 1987) and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA 1987).The integrist perspective combines analytic reductionistic study with comparative contextual study, with emphasis on the latter. This integrative approach moves from over-reliance on utilist information services such as impact assessment towards transactive study. Our own compromise emphasizes a stress-response approach to a partial understanding of complex cultural-natural interactions within ecosystems. Both cultural and natural attributes of ecosystems must be addressed.Currently the federal Canadian government tends toward an exploitist worldview; current government R&D funding and subsidies reflect this view. Old-fashioned scientists who rely on a monocular analytical vision of the world's minutiae may find contextual historical study offensive; these scientists hold sway on some advisory boards and hence research funding. Difficulty in finding funding for integrist information services should not be interpreted as a lack of need for this information; rather this difficulty results from resistance to a changing worldview.