Faced with the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and integrate resources scarcity, it has become essential to assess ecological risks on a territorial scale. The criterion of “ecological sustainability” must be rigorously studied and used to guide territorial action. This new approach, which demands a global, systemic, and interdisciplinary perspective, is at the heart of the convictions and work of two research and teaching chairs1 at ESTP.
As with its predecessors, the sixth assessment report from the IPCC clearly warns against the effects of climate change. The increasing frequency of droughts, heatwaves, storms, and other extreme events are tangible illustrations of this. As greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions continue to rise, it is more than urgent to take drastic measures to decarbonize our production and consumption systems. This ambition is not without challenges in an economy whose very foundations are based on fossil fuels.
Territories are at the forefront of this paradigm shift. To continue to function and meet the essential needs of their populations, they need to evolve or even transform. This does not mean returning to a pre-industrial state but rather fully anchoring their strategy firmly in the present. Here, the concept of resilience – i.e., the ability of territories to adapt to major disruptions by reorganizing or modifying their structure, while preserving their essential functions, cohesion, identity and governance capacity – becomes critical.
WELCOME TO 2051
In the absence of data and observations on territorial resilience, let us imagine a not-so-distant future: October 2051. The president of one of France’s 300 natural regions is organizing, for the 28th consecutive year since 2023, a regional conference on “territorial resilience.” These “natural regions” or “traditional regions of France” are defined as areas of limited size with homogeneous physical characteristics due to their location, climate, or natural landscape, or because of their economy, history, and human or ethnological characteristics.
This year is a special one: the goals set for 2024 have been achieved despite global and territorial shocks and chronic stresses. Not only the community has been able to reduce its GHG emissions by 85% compared to 1990, but it has also successfully balanced the residual emissions across all value chains involving the region through the Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry (LULUCF) sector, which tracks the emissions and absorptions of the region’s natural carbon sinks. Energy consumption has returned to levels from the late 1960s, in line with the trajectory of energy futures published by RTE, France’s electricity transmission system operator, in February 2022. The rural region’s population has tripled over the period, and despite this, housing, food, health, education, security and justice indicators have never been better.
While such a future is both desirable and possible, it is far from the reality that awaits many regions. At any rate, this is the consensus of the scientific community, which calls for a paradigm shift in development, governance and methodologies to guide collective transformative action that is ecologically sustainable.
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: REDEFINING THE CONCEPT TO RETHINK COLLECTIVE ACTION
To steer collective action on territorial resilience, we must revisit the definition of “sustainable development” and what may be considered as frequent mistranslation. Contrary to popular belief, the Brundtland Report3 . Our Common Future was not the first to introduce the concept of “sustainable development,” which has since become a political vision for development, particularly in Western countries.
An earlier publication (IUCN, 19804) describes “sustainable development” with the prerequisite of conserving living resources: “Conservation is a positive approach that encompasses preservation, maintenance, sustainable use, restoration, and improvement of the natural environment.” Living resources differ significantly from non-living resources: they are renewable if conserved and destructible if not.
Development and conservation are both at the service of humanity. Sustainable development operates as a dual mechanism: on the one hand, development must enable the achievement of social well-being objectives through the production and consumption of goods and services, which inevitably and extensively use the biosphere’s resources. In turn, conservation aims to achieve these objectives by ensuring that this resource use remains sustainable, in balance with the “well-being of natural ecosystems,” in reference to their capacity to renew themselves, and to conserve their diversity and quality. This non-political definition is the one that must guide the paradigm shift.
TERRITORIAL RESILIENCE AND ECOLOGICAL SUSTAINABILITY: LESSONS LEARNED
How can this transformation be achieved at the territorial level? France Villes et Territoires Durables (FVD) association brings together all the public and private stakeholders involved in sustainable and resilient urban development, with this ambition at the heart of its mission.
To accelerate sustainable transformation and resilience of our territories, FVD has identified four key levers5 : sobriety for responsible territories, resilience for adaptive and responsive territories, inclusion for territories “for and with everyone,” and creativity for greater cooperation and complementarity among territories.
Recognizing that development today is neither sustainable nor ecologically viable, FVD, in collaboration with French and international institutions, experts, and local authorities, has chosen planetary boundaries6 as its territorial compass. Defined by the Stockholm Resilience Center7, these boundaries encompass nine interdependent natural processes that condition Earth’s habitability (six of which are already breached) and the prosperity of human societies.
FVD’s strategy involves five key steps: diagnosing, prioritizing, imagining a collective narrative, assessing impacts, and reporting. One significant challenge is mobilizing local stakeholders to co-develop the diagnosis, priorities, and shared narrative for collective transformative action that is ecologically sustainable.
Territorial resilience is also a core focus of ESTP’s research and training programs. The Risk Architecture and Decision Management Technology Platform at ESTP’s Research Institute has been conducting research, experimental development, and innovation for nearly two decades.
The Risk Architecture and Decision Management Technology Platform at ESTP’s Research Institute has been conducting research, experimental development, and innovation for nearly two decades. At the heart of this work, two key concepts define the internal and external environments of social organizations, providing actionable solutions: complexity and uncertainty. Thus, the systems approach is multiscale (technical, socio-technical, socio-economic, and socio-ecological). Decision-making by various stakeholders follows a multi-criterion, intertemporal approach, considering the combinations of available resources and the decisions they may influence.
Since the start of the industrial era, particularly after World War II, very few technical systems— or “machines,” as defined by Jean-Marc Jancovici and Christophe Blain in Le Monde sans fin8 —have achieved ecological sustainability. This concept was the focus of two papers presented at the “Lambda Mu 23” Congress under the theme “Innovation and Risk Mastering for a Sustainable Future.”9
Among the inspiring exceptions is the water supply and sanitation system of the city of Paris, designed by Eugène Belgrand in the mid-19th century. Despite population growth, it still delivers the same operational reliability (dependability) in terms of service and continues to use gravity to function.
Following this example, ESTP is working to integrate ecological sustainability into the properties of technical systems. A commitment that is behind the creation of the Sustainable Dependability Chair this year. Among the key initiatives: training the engineermanagers of tomorrow to align with the objectives of the Paris Agreement for 2030 and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. Additionally, as well as strengthening the leadership of their organizations by adopting sector-specific best practices that create sustainable value.
BRINGING OUT FUTURE BEHAVIORS AT THE RIGHT LOCAL SCALE
To define a motivating horizon, our ESTP research team has developed a methodology in the form of a systemic framework. This framework incorporates demographic, social, societal, economic, technological, energy-related, regulatory, and financial aspects. Insights about multiple stakeholders can be derived from this framework, enabling a collective representation of issues, risks, opportunities, shared values, and critical paths to achieve objectives.
Projects that combine human occupation of space within natural regions with homogenous physical characteristics (geomorphology, geology, climate, soil, water resources) seem to be the most effective scale for intervention.
Territorial resilience and sustainable dependability are crucial imperatives in addressing today’s environmental challenges. These concepts cannot simply be decreed but require decisive choices. Convinced of the importance of training committed and skilled engineers in these areas, ESTP teams are mobilizing to embed sustainability at the core of their teaching programs. Integrated with a systemic approach, this vision will help reinvent a common future in territories that remain sustainably livable over the long term.
1. Sustainable Buildings for the Future et Sustainable Dependability
2. Utilisation des Terres, Changement d’Affectation des Terres et Foresterie.
3. Brundtland, G. H. (1987). Notre avenir à tous. Rapport de la Commission mondiale sur l’environnement et le développement de l’Organisation des Nations
Unies. Oxford University Press.
4. IUCN (1980). World Conservation Strategy. Living Resource Conservation for Sustainable Development. Prepared by IUCN with the advice and financial
assistance od UNEP and WWF and in collaboration of the FAO and UNESCO. IUCN-UNEP-WWF.
5. France Villes & territoires Durables – Le Manifeste – Url : https://francevilledurable.fr/lassociation/manifeste/
6. FVD (2023b, 22 octobre). Les limites planétaires : nouvelle boussole pour la planification territoriale. https://francevilledurable.fr/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/
Fiche-Limites-Planetaires-web.pdf. France Villes & Territoires Durables.
7. Planetary boundaries, Stockholm Resilience Centre – url : https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/planetary-boundaries.html
8. Jancovici, J-M, Blain, C. (2021). Le Monde sans fin. Dargaud.
9. Claude, F., Signoret, J-P. (2022). La sûreté de fonctionnement soutenable : motivations. État de l’art, verrous et hypothèses scientifiques (1). Innovations et
maîtrise des risques pour un avenir durable. Actes du Congrès Lambda Mu 23 de l’Institut de Maîtrise des Risques.
by FRANCIS CLAUDE, Team Leader at the ESTP Research Institute and Chairholder, and Sébastien Maire, General Delegate of France Villes & Territoires Durables