Photo: Florian Fisch

Back in the 19th century, says the historian Frank Uekötter, members of the bourgeoisie keen to show off their erudition would quote Goethe. Today, citizens wanting to show off their ecological credentials drop the word ‘sustainability’ into conversation instead. But in each case, says Uekötter, the result is no more than “a well-sounding reference point devoid of deeper meaning”. He penned his obituary for the word and its inflationary use already back in 2014 in the journal ‘Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte’. Six years later, in 2020, Hildesheim University similarly warned that the popularity of the concept of ‘sustainability’ was making it into nothing more than an “overused buzzword”.

In fact, as the science journalist Axel Bojanowski has explained, the meaning of the word has been vague from the outset . Hans Carl von Carlowitz first used its German equivalent, ‘Nachhaltigkeit’, in a silvicultural study in 1713 when he pondered how wood as a resource “might be used in a manner that is continuous, consistent and sustainable”. He wanted to ensure the long-term availability of wood and peat for metal processing in the Erz mountains. His work is rightly regarded as groundbreaking today, says Bojanowksi. But his efforts were offset by the “depletion of a raw material that is non-renewable: iron ore”. The term ‘sustainability’, says Bojanowski, is too ambiguous and leads to fraudulent labelling – which is why he has long since ceased to use it in his journalism.