The four “System Conditions” are principles for sustainability designed to help leaders make decisions toward long-term success in the face of current society’s complex environmental and social issues. This principled definition was created through a consensus process among a multi-disciplinary group of scientists in collaboration with The Natural Step, a non-profit, and refined over several years through international peer-review. The System Conditions are based on natural science, including the laws of thermodynamics, as well as what we have learned from the social sciences. Written as constraints or boundaries within which we can exercise our creativity, they are helpful in framing the reasons behind green building standards such as LEED and in guiding the improvement of our standards.

System Condition One

System Condition One says we cannot dig substances out of the earth and spread them around the biosphere faster than natural cycles can break them down and integrate them safely into ecosystems or redeposit them back into the crust. We did not evolve in contact with many of the rarer elements found in the crust such as mercury, cadmium and lead. They are normally only found in trace amounts on the Earth’s surface or the atmosphere. Therefore, when we disperse these elements into the biosphere, they eventually concentrate to the point that we experience toxicity. Natural systems are resilient and can withstand a certain amount of stress, but all systems have their limits. For the most part, we do not know where these limits are in the ecosystems that sustain us. However, if we exceed these thresholds, we find out very quickly because the damage is permanent, causing such problems as loss of reproductive capacity, loss of species and eventually, if enough damage occurs, complete ecosystem collapse.

A specific example of current concern is the rise in concentration of mercury in marine ecosystems and, via the food chain, in humans around the world. To give some idea of the scale of the problem, mercury is only one of 16 relatively rare and potentially problematic elements that are currently being dispersed through the burning of fossil fuels, causing them to accumulate at concentrations beyond what is normally found in ecosystems. Examples of these other elements include cadmium, lead, molybdenum, uranium and chromium, all of which have toxicity to humans as well as other species.

What are System Condition One’s implications for green building standards?

Everything we can do in our built environment to wean ourselves off the use of fossil fuels is critical to curb these unnatural flows of toxic elements. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED™) and the EarthCraft House™ program have done wonders in our region to raise awareness and affect positive action. By asking for thoughtful design to reduce energy use and transportation needs and by encouraging projects that substitute renewable energy sources for fossil fuels, we can begin to curb global climate change. In addition, because we already unearth these scarce elements when we mine or drill for fossil fuels and minerals, we use them in various toxic compounds that end up in our buildings, our landfills and eventually our water. Paints, electronics and batteries should contain more benign substances to perform functions currently served by the rarer elements already mentioned.

The Green Seal standard for paints used under LEED for New Construction is an example of a standard that is addressing this issue, as is the Toxic Material Source Reduction credit in LEED for Existing Buildings. However, there is no big movement to shift our electronics industry away from using toxic elements, nor toward reclaiming products for recycling at the end of their useful lives.

System Condition Two

System Condition Two deals with two kinds of substances – persistent substances that are foreign to nature such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and naturally existing substances introduced into the biosphere by humans in unnatural concentrations such as CO2. The problem with persistent substances is that no matter how carefully we contain them in tight, closed technological loops where we monitor them throughout their life cycle, matter tends to disperse, so eventually some will leak out into the biosphere. Because these substances stick around a long time, they will accumulate and if a high enough concentration occurs, we may cross a threshold of what our ecosystems (or our bodies) can tolerate. Again, we did not evolve with these substances and many of them are very toxic to humans and ecosystems.

A couple of famous examples that are being rectified by removing chemicals from the market are the banning of DDT (in developed countries) and the phase-out of ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) legislated under the 1987 Montreal Protocol. One example that is currently being recognized as problematic, but is not yet slated for phase-out in the U.S., is phthalates which are found in plasticizers (e.g. in PVC – polyvinyl chloride), varnishes, lubricants, nail polish, perfumes and other cosmetics. Phthalates have been linked to endocrine disruption and reproductive problems in humans and have been banned in the European Union.

The most familiar examples of natural substances being systematically introduced by humans into the biosphere are carbon dioxide and methane (CH4) and their connection to global warming. Less known by the general public are the increasing concentrations of nitrous oxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide. Nitrous oxide (N2O), another of the top six greenhouse gases, is emitted during combustion of fossil fuels in automobiles, power plants and industry.

Various nitrogen oxides (NOx), created during combustion processes (for example, in automobile engines), are key ingredients in ground level ozone. Sulphur dioxide (SO2), a major cause of acid rain, is emitted primarily by coal and oil burning power plants.

What are System Condition Two’s implications for green building standards?

While LEED addresses CFCs, HCFCs and halons, we need to beef up building industry standards to phase out phthalates, chlorinated paraffins used in paint additives and plasticizers, pentachlorophenol found in wood preservatives and dioxins as byproducts of metal refining. We must find benign substitutes for these substances or for the practices that underlie their use or production as a by-product.

With regard to natural substances, emissions of CO2, CH4, and SO2 by a combination of dematerializations and substitutions, can reduce emissions caused by fossil-fuel based energy by making optimal use of existing buildings, designing smaller buildings with efficient programming, making use of passive solar design and daylighting, using fewer and more energy efficient appliances and choosing materials with low energy inputs in their extraction and manufacture. We can reduce the need for fossil fuel-based transport by using local materials, smart town planning, mass transit and by encouraging cycling. By reducing our energy demands, we make it feasible to replace fossil fuel-based energy with renewable energy systems. LEED and EarthCraft both address these issues in their point structures. The development and use of alternatives to cement due to the high CO2 emissions and energy use involved in its manufacture should be advocated as well.

System Condition Three

System Condition Three reminds us that humans are part of a larger fabric of nature and that if we put too many holes in this fabric, it will unravel. There are two primary ways we degrade nature – by over harvesting such as in the clear cutting of forests or fishing a species beyond its biological limit, and by displacing or physically altering ecosystems such as by paving them over, removing them to dig for building materials or spoiling them with wastes and runoff.

What are System Condition Three’s implications for green building standards?

We need to recycle what we have already harvested and remediate ecosystems we have disturbed. With current population growth projections, we also need to look at how we will make use of the land we have already claimed for humans rather than continuing to spread to new greenfields. LEED encourages us to reuse buildings and materials, to use materials with recycled content, to restore open space and to create development density rather than sprawl. What is missing is a systems perspective on bioregional land use and a clear (measurable) connection between ecosystem health and limits placed on the built environment. For example, recent studies in the Etowah River watershed to protect endangered fish showed that at 5% imperviousness in developments within the watershed, the Etowah Darter populations began to decline. Based on this research, community members cooperated to agree on stormwater runoff limits. Green building guidelines that encourage such local ecosystems research and resulting local standards could help us design within the boundaries of System Condition Three.

Another example where building standards could be linked to the bigger picture is in the tendency to locate agriculture in monocropped fields outside of cities while we use water in cities to irrigate grass. By bringing smaller scale, polyculture-based food production into our cityscapes and parks, we can stack the functions of beauty, food production and recreation and minimize our water, land and transportation use. Standards could be added to support such land use planning at both the community and individual home scale.

System Condition Four

Finally, System Condition Four addresses the core reason for our society’s existence - meeting human needs. First, it is helpful to define the human needs that must be met in order for people to be physically, mentally and emotionally healthy. Manfred Max-Neef and Marshall Rosenberg independently studied cultures around the globe and concluded that there are roughly ten basic human needs that are found everywhere: love, physical nurturance (food, water, shelter, rest, sexual expression and touch), protection, play, creativity, identity/integrity, spiritual communion (which can include beauty, order, inspiration, peace, transcendence), understanding, participation and freedom. Cultures choose different strategies to meet these needs and those strategies have changed over time, but the underlying needs have remained the same.

Given that background, some examples of how our capacity to meet those needs could be systematically undermined would be conditions which cause widespread mistrust, alienation, isolation, ongoing poor psychological health, lack of rest, lack of access to safe water, food or shelter, and widespread discrimination preventing participation.

Note that the majority of our needs can be met through healthy human contact and social interaction within communities rather than through consumption of material goods. In the U.S., if our economic indicators and our culture were to focus less on goods as satisfiers and more on meeting relational human needs, we could actually increase our quality of life, use fewer resources, create less pollution and reduce violence.

What are System Condition Four’s implications for green building standards?

As designers and builders working toward sustainability, creating spaces that help us meet our relational and physical needs is key. First, we need to make sure people at all income levels have access to affordable housing, which points to equitable use of resources globally. We can incorporate these considerations into standards by encouraging building reuse as in LEED and smaller sizing of homes as in the EarthCraft House program.

In 1990, IKEA adopted The Natural Step as the basic structure for implementation of its environmental policy and plan. Building places we love that are both functional and beautiful in meeting our needs will support a healthy social atmosphere and motivate us to care about maintenance. Involving tenants or community members in building design and ongoing decision-making during occupancy can meet needs for creativity and participation. When we design inviting lounges, comfortable break rooms, and safe exercise spaces, we give opportunities for people to connect.

Community garden spaces, playing fields and shaded benches encourage interaction. Design can also work to protect the commons – providing clean water, food-producing plants and trees for shade and fuel to insure physical needs over the long run. We can create restful, peaceful, dignified havens using sound proofing and privacy balanced with spaces that invite conversation and that are friendly and walkable for all people, including children and elders. By using local, natural materials, native plants and landscapes that invite in wildlife we can provide people with a sense of place and identity as well as connection to the rest of nature.

People in the industrialized world sometimes forget that we are an integral part of nature. Even the fact that we have the word “nature” in our language indicates we see ourselves as something separate whereas many indigenous tribal cultures’ languages do not have this concept. In short, the biggest changes we need to make are in our own heads. Our culture is gradually beginning to understand that we are part of an interconnected whole. If we can actualize this understanding by structuring our society and our built environment to meet everyone’s needs worldwide, we will be making great strides toward sustainability and true quality of life. Part of this transformation will be looking at the building sector and asking some guiding questions: How is this design meeting the fundamental human needs of its inhabitants? How is it contributing to the creation of a sustainable society? It is our responsibility to start answering these questions now and to start creating a built environment that is a fractal of the larger ecological systems upon which we depend.

The System Conditions for Sustainability

In a sustainable society, nature is not subject to systematically increasing…
… concentrations of substances extracted from the Earth’s crust,
… concentrations of substances produced by society,
… degradation by physical means

And in that society, people are not subject to…
… conditions that systematically undermine their capacity to meet their needs. n

Susan graduated from Blekinge Institute of Technology in Karlskrona , Sweden with a Master’s in Strategic Leadership Toward Sustainability. Her education focused on how to use The Natural Step framework to help governments, businesses and organizations plan for and transition to socially, ecologically and economically sustainable practices.