Sustainability Urgently Needs a Reality Check in 2025

Apr 15 2025 By Evelyne Hoffman Ecology 0 Comments

The current approach to sustainability fails. While it promises solutions, and does often also deliver these, it unfortunately often also ignores the people most affected by environmental damage.

Strategies that prioritize growth or technology leave behind those who face systemic racism, poverty, and exclusion. A growing number of voices demand a complete overhaul. Sustainability must mean equity, justice, and shared power – not just carbon reductions.

In this article we will have a critical look at the state of sustainability in 2025. And remind, this criticism did not start now, the below video is from 2023 for instance, but remains very actual.

Traditional Models Exclude the Vulnerable

Sustainability used to be synonymous with energy efficiency and economic growth. These goals, while not inherently flawed, have become blinders. Current strategies often serve the affluent and technologically advanced while deepening structural inequalities elsewhere.

Vulnerable groups – those already suffering from environmental degradation – rarely benefit. Worse, the promise of “sustainability” ends up reinforcing the same extractive systems that created the problem.

Example 1: In Flint, Michigan, residents – mostly Black and low-income – were exposed to toxic lead in drinking water due to systemic neglect.

Example 2: In Jakarta, Indonesia, poor communities face repeated flooding, worsened by land subsidence and poorly planned infrastructure.

Environmental Justice: A Core Priority

Environmental justice brings a necessary shift in perspective. It focuses not only on ecological outcomes but on how those outcomes are distributed. Pollution, resource extraction, and industrial hazards overwhelmingly impact communities already marginalized by race, class, or geography.

Environmental justice redefines sustainability to include equity, dismantling systems that allow one group to thrive while another suffers.

Exposure to Air Pollution by Race and Income (U.S.)

Group	PM2.5 Exposure (µg/m³)	% Above Safe Levels
White, affluent	7.2	8%
Black, low-income	11.4	61%
Latino, low-income	10.7	53%

Example 3: A study by the EPA found Black Americans are exposed to 1.5 times more particulate pollution than white Americans.

Example 4: Native American reservations near uranium mines suffer increased cancer rates due to toxic exposure.

Greenhushing and Corporate Silence

Corporate sustainability has entered a paradox. Transparency is expected, but disclosure can trigger backlash. As fears of greenwashing allegations grow, companies increasingly opt to say nothing at all – a phenomenon now dubbed “greenhushing.” This silence stalls public learning, hides meaningful work, and weakens public accountability. Without clear communication, even genuine sustainability efforts lose credibility and momentum.

Example 5: A 2023 South Pole report found that 25% of companies with net-zero targets did not publicly communicate them.

Example 6: Legal action against H&M and other brands over vague “conscious collection” claims triggered industry-wide silence.

Greenhushing Trends in Corporations (2022–2024)

Year	% of Companies Withholding ESG Goals
2022	14%
2023	23%
2024	31%

Reassessing Economic Priorities

Traditional economic metrics reward extraction and overconsumption. Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the most cited measure of progress, fails to capture environmental degradation or social disparity. Sustainability can no longer afford to ignore these blind spots. Ecological economics calls for new metrics that reflect long-term well-being, resource regeneration, and planetary limits.

Example 7: Costa Rica, with a GDP per capita 5x lower than the U.S., outperforms the U.S. in biodiversity protection and citizen happiness.

Example 8: Bhutan measures Gross National Happiness and maintains 72% forest cover while remaining carbon negative.

Participatory Approaches Lead to Better Outcomes

Communities impacted by environmental injustice often know best what needs to change. Yet most sustainability initiatives are designed without their input. Participatory approaches flip this model. They recognize lived experience, local knowledge, and community autonomy as assets, not obstacles. When communities are architects of their own solutions, sustainability becomes resilient and relevant.

Example 9: In Brazil’s Amazon, the Chico Mendes Extractive Reserve gave local people land rights, leading to lower deforestation rates.

Example 10: Urban greening in Medellín, Colombia, succeeded after shifting from expert-led to community-led design.

Community-Led vs Expert-Led Project Outcomes

Metric	Expert-Led	Community-Led
Community Satisfaction	42%	88%
Project Longevity (5+ years)	36%	74%
Biodiversity Index Increase	14%	47%

Corporate Social Responsibility Under Scrutiny

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) once aimed to align profit with ethics. Today, it often masks business-as-usual under a green veneer. With sustainability now a marketing trend, CSR strategies are frequently designed for image protection rather than structural change. Without strict oversight and impact verification, these initiatives risk becoming empty gestures.

Example 11: Coca-Cola pledged to use recycled plastics but remains one of the top plastic polluters globally.

Example 12: Shell invested in clean energy marketing while expanding fossil fuel exploration as per their 2022 annual report.

Risks of Superficial Green Solutions

Not all that’s labeled “green” supports true sustainability. Many widely adopted practices – like recycling programs or biofuels – fail to address root causes or deliver promised outcomes. These quick fixes often benefit corporations more than communities and shift burdens instead of solving them. Sustainability must be structural, not superficial.

Example 13: Fish farms in Norway contributed to wild salmon decline due to disease and pollution.

Example 14: Palm oil-based biofuel promoted as “green” has driven deforestation in Indonesia.

Reported Outcomes of Misapplied Green Tech

Practice	Intended Outcome	Reported Impact
Fish Farming	Sustainable protein	Local biodiversity decline
Biofuels	Lower emissions	Rainforest destruction
Recycling Programs	Waste reduction	Exported waste to Global South

Climate Crisis Exposes Deep Inequality

The climate crisis does not impact everyone equally. Those least responsible for carbon emissions – often low-income and racialized communities – suffer the most. Their infrastructure is weaker. Their access to resources is limited. Their political representation is lacking. Any sustainability plan that fails to center these realities cannot succeed.

Example 15: In Puerto Rico, post-Hurricane Maria recovery lagged years behind mainland U.S. disaster relief timelines.

Disparity in Climate Disaster Recovery Times

Region	Avg Recovery Time (Months)
Florida (Irma)	5
Puerto Rico (Maria)	15
Texas (Harvey)	4

Policy Innovations for Equity

New legal tools are emerging to address overlapping injustices. Environmental justice screening, cumulative impact assessments, and equity budgeting aim to embed fairness into environmental governance. These policies recognize that exposure to pollution, vulnerability to climate shocks, and access to green infrastructure are inseparable from race, class, and power.

• Environmental Justice Screening Tools: Used in California to prioritize investments in overburdened areas.
• Cumulative Impact Assessments: Now required in New Jersey for industrial permitting.

Data Gaps and Governance Failures

Sustainability without accurate data is guesswork. Yet most countries lack the granular, disaggregated data needed to understand how policies affect different groups. Without tracking inequality, sustainability measures risk entrenching it. Transparent, accessible, and locally relevant data systems are essential to drive better decisions.

Example: A 2021 UN report found that only 31% of countries had disaggregated environmental data by income or race.

Centering Marginalized Communities

Marginalized Communities Benefits must become central – not peripheral – to sustainability. Equity isn’t a bonus; it’s a benchmark. This shift requires rejecting business-as-usual models and investing in structural change.

Community insight, prioritizing justice, and confronting uncomfortable truths needs to be valued, so that we can redefine sustainability as something more than green branding or carbon math. We can make it real, inclusive, and lasting.

Don’t Preserve the Status Quo in Sustainability

Sustainability today is at a breaking point. While it promises a better future, its current form often preserves the status quo – benefiting the powerful while sidelining those most affected by environmental collapse. This reality demands more than surface-level reform. It requires a fundamental shift in how we define progress, allocate resources, and measure success.

True sustainability cannot operate on technocratic fixes, green branding, or growth-driven models alone. It must center the voices and knowledge of communities historically excluded from decision-making. It must confront environmental racism, dismantle class-based inequities, and ensure that social justice is not treated as a side issue, but as the foundation of all environmental efforts.

The examples, data, and failures discussed here reveal a clear pattern: sustainability that ignores power structures reinforces them. Climate policies that do not explicitly address inequality risk deepening it. Corporate strategies that lack transparency and accountability contribute to public mistrust. And solutions that exclude local communities are bound to fail.

To move forward, sustainability must become synonymous with equity, participation, and structural change. That means redefining what success looks like – from GDP growth to ecological health, from corporate image to community resilience. It means designing systems where the benefits of clean air, safe water, green spaces, and climate adaptation are shared by all – not hoarded by the few.

We are not lacking in knowledge, tools, or case studies. What’s needed is political courage, public pressure, and a refusal to accept sustainability that only sustains inequality. This is the reality check we can no longer delay. The choice is stark: evolve sustainability into a force for justice – or watch it collapse under its contradictions.

Sources

• EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)
• World Bank – Data for Better Lives (2021)
• Gross National Happiness Commission – Bhutan

---

FAQ: Sustainability Reality Check

Q1: What is the main issue with current sustainability models?

Most current models focus on growth and technology while ignoring the social and structural inequalities that marginalize communities already suffering from environmental harm. Sustainability should mean equity and justice—not just carbon reduction.

Q2: Why do traditional sustainability strategies fail vulnerable communities?

They prioritize affluent and technologically advanced regions. This reinforces extractive systems, leaving marginalized groups exposed to pollution, displacement, and underinvestment.

Q3: What does ‘environmental justice’ mean in this context?

Environmental justice ensures fair treatment of all people regardless of race, income, or geography in environmental policies. It calls for dismantling systemic inequalities and redistributing environmental benefits.

Q4: What is greenhushing and why is it a problem?

Greenhushing is when companies withhold sustainability information out of fear of backlash or legal action. This stifles public awareness and undermines accountability, even when companies are making real efforts.

Q5: Why is GDP a flawed metric for sustainability?

GDP doesn’t account for ecological destruction or social inequality. Alternatives like Gross National Happiness or ecological well-being provide more balanced and sustainable indicators.

Q6: How do participatory approaches improve sustainability outcomes?

When local communities lead projects, results last longer and reflect actual needs. These approaches increase community satisfaction, reduce conflict, and enhance biodiversity.

Q7: Is Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) effective?

Often, no. Without regulation and transparency, CSR becomes a marketing tactic. True CSR requires measurable impacts and accountability structures—not just good PR.

Q8: What are some examples of ‘green’ solutions that backfired?

• Fish farming harming wild populations
• Palm oil biofuels accelerating deforestation
• Recycling programs offloading waste to poorer countries

Q9: How does the climate crisis deepen inequality?

Marginalized groups contribute least to emissions but suffer most from disasters. Their limited resources and political influence make recovery slower and vulnerability higher.

Q10: What policy tools can ensure equity in sustainability?

Tools like environmental justice screening and cumulative impact assessments help policymakers identify and correct structural imbalances in environmental planning.

Q11: Why is disaggregated data important for sustainability?

Without data segmented by race, income, or geography, it’s impossible to measure who benefits or suffers from environmental policies. Better data ensures targeted and fair interventions.

Q12: What role should communities play in future sustainability efforts?

They should lead them. Community-led projects are more resilient, inclusive, and grounded in local needs and knowledge.

Q13: How do economic models need to evolve?

Economics must move beyond profit. Models must value ecosystems, cultural preservation, and social cohesion. This means adopting post-growth and regenerative frameworks.

Q14: How can we tell if a sustainability effort is authentic?

Look for transparency, community involvement, third-party audits, and long-term impact—not vague promises or rebranding exercises.

Q15: What’s the bottom line of this sustainability reality check?

To be meaningful, sustainability must prioritize justice. It must confront the root causes of inequality and environmental degradation—especially for those who’ve historically paid the highest price.