[pt] O atual contexto mundial de profundas mudanças ambientais globais, e impactos dos humanos sobre o meio ambiente cada vez mais complexos, requer uma mudança de comportamento e educação para conter tais impactos e seus efeitos. A sustentabilidade como conceito, representando as diversas visões e formas de conhecimento e de sustentabilidades existentes no mundo, ganha cada vez mais destaque neste contexto, como forma de enfrentamento a estes problemas. Nesse sentido, uma educação para sustentabilidade torna-se cada vez mais necessária para lidar com as questões da sociedade moderna. Contudo, para se propor a isso, a própria educação precisa de uma renovação estrutural, tendo em vista a construção de uma educação participativa, não apenas para alunos e professores em sala de aula, mas também trazendo para dentro do ambiente acadêmico atores, experiências e vivências da sociedade civil, de grupos tradicionais e de grupos marginalizados, historicamente não incluídos nestas construções. Portanto, a construção da educação para sustentabilidade, e da própria sustentabilidade em si, de forma participativa, passa por uma desconstrução e reconstrução do formato de educação majoritariamente presente no ambiente universitário brasileiro, e para isso é importante entender quais são os preceitos, pilares e competências fundamentais que devem servir como base para construção de uma educação para sustentabilidade. / [en] The current global context of profound environmental changes, and increasingly complex human impacts on the environment, requires a change in behavior and education to contain such impacts and their effects. Sustainability as a concept, representing the various visions and forms of knowledge and sustainability existing in the world, is increasingly highlighted in this context, as a way to deal with these problems. In this sense, an education for sustainability becomes increasingly necessary to deal with the issues of modern society. However, in order to propose this, education itself needs a structural renovation, aiming at the construction of participatory processes, not only for students and teachers in the classroom, but also by bringing into the academic environment actors, and experiences from civil society, indigenous and other traditional and marginalized groups, historically not included in these constructions. Therefore, the development of education for sustainability, and of sustainability itself, in a participatory way, goes through the deconstruction and reconstruction of the education format mostly present in the Brazilian university environment, and for this it is important to understand which are the precepts, pillars, and fundamental competencies that should serve as a basis for the construction of an education for sustainability.

This thesis is a critical review of two central theories in the modern sustainability paradigm – namely… (1) the theory that the Earth’s geosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere and atmosphere form a complex adaptive system – the Earth system, and (2) the theory that all human activities are intrinsically dependent on, and constrained by, non-anthropogenic states and processes in the Earth system. The thesis explains the origins and the logic of these theories, and subjects them to formal, semi-formal and comparative criticism. Ultimately, it refutes both on formal and comparative grounds. Most importantly, it shows that theories 1 and 2 are in conflict with the theory of evolution by natural selection, and with the hypothetico-deductive model of scientific research. It also shows that they are in conflict – both directly and indirectly – with the known laws of physics. While it is true that all human activities rely on biospheric resources today, there are no physical, or natural laws that make it impossible for us to break those dependencies over time. In fact, the thesis shows that it is possible in principle to satisfy any human need by strictly artificial means, and abiotic resources that exist in abundance both inside and outside of the Earth system. An important corollary to this finding is that social and economic progress is not inextricably tied – as the modern sustainability literature suggests – to the exploitation of finite and rapidly diminishing resources here on Earth. Theories 1 and 2 both contribute to this confusion, and hence, to the bleak and irrational Malthusianism that still permeates so much of the sustainability domain. In addition, they appear to blind many researchers to the ecological benefits of technological development. That humanity can break its dependence on the biosphere is a very good thing for its non-human inhabitants. As we become more technologically advanced, we will find it easier and easier to sustain ourselves without destabilizing the world's ecosystems. The Earth’s biosphere is an oasis of beauty, complexity and connection in a Universe that is overwhelmingly empty and boring. As the only animals capable of appreciating this fact, we have a clear moral duty to protect and preserve it. And we can protect and preserve it. If we just let go of the religious ideas that have dominated our field since its inception, we will find that our potential to do good in the world is far greater than we previously imagined.

<a>Global trends and factors, such as the increased level of globalization, climate change, resource scarcity, and awareness of social and environmental responsibilities, as well as fiercer competition and lower profit margins in all industries, force organizations to act to retain, regain, or sustain their competitive advantages for long-term survival. These trends and factors are historically known to bring about innovations that drive the evolution of industries. Sustainability is considered to be such an innovation to achieve fiscally sound, environmentally conscious, and socially progressive organizations and supply chains. Sustainable Development and Sustainability notions are among trending topics of 21st century. Elevated sustainability concerns of various stakeholders have been forcing members of all industries to evolve into their more environmentally and socially responsible versions. This study was initiated through a comprehensive literature review phase that reviewed 477 articles published in five major databases from 1990 to 2018. The purpose of this review was to assess the current state-of-the art on the subject of lean-driven sustainability. Based on descriptive and contextual analysis, synergies, divergences, and the extent of two-way permeability of lean and sustainability concepts from the perspective of intra- and inter-organizational operations were identified along with future research opportunities. Fundamental strengths and weaknesses of both concepts, existing strong synergies and untapped potential, along with their key contributors, the potential-use cases of lean tools to derive sustainable solutions are highlighted in this review. Next, based on the findings of systematic literature review, an innovative, holistic, versatile and scalable tool was developed to assess and benchmark sustainability performance of organizations and supply chains. The proposed framework was established upon trivet structure of Triple Bottom Line philosophy and fueled by Lean, Six-Sigma and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodologies for accurate and effective measurement of sustainability performance. Completeness of the framework was ensured through development of first-generation Key Performance Indicator (KPI) pool with 33 indicators, a unique work environment assessment mechanism for safety and environmental protection issues in terms of 11 risk categories and by construction of an ownership structure for ease of framework deployment. Proposed framework is expected to help with true sustainability performance improvement and benchmarking objectives at a range of business levels from facility to sectoral operations. Upon completion of the development phase, the Sustainability Benchmarking Tool (SBT) Framework was validated at the facility level within the context of value-added wood products manufacturing. Strengths and weaknesses of the system were identified within the scope of Bronze Frontier maturity level of the framework and tackled through a six-step analytical and quantitative reasoning methodology. The secondary objective of the validation phase was to document how value-added wood products industries can take advantage of natural properties of wood to become frontiers of sustainability innovation. In the end, True Sustainability performance of the target facility was improved by 2.37 base points, while economic and environmental performance was increased from being a system weakness to achieving an acceptable index score benchmark of 8.41 and system strength level of 9.31, respectively. Social sustainability score increased by 2.02 base points as a function of better gender bias ratio. The financial performance of the system improved from a 33% loss to 46.23% profit in the post-improvement state. Reductions in CO₂ emissions (55.16%), energy consumption (50.31%), solid waste generation (72.03%), non-value-added-time (89.30%) and cost performance (64.77%) were other significant achievements of the study. In the end, SBT Framework was successfully validated at the facility level and target facility evolved into its leaner, cleaner and more responsible version of itself. Furthermore, manufacturing industries of all sorts are key stakeholders, which rely on universities to satisfy the demand for competent workforce. Society also expects universities to educate youth and contribute to their self-development by achieving both, scientific and intellectual knowledge saturation. To expand the contribution of the study to the body of knowledge in the fields of Sustainability and Modern Management techniques, an undergraduate level course curriculum that integrates modern management techniques and sustainability concepts with wood products industry dynamics was developed. Students’ pre- and post-education awareness of, and familiarity with sustainability, potential consequences of ignored sustainability issues, modern management techniques, global trends, innovation waves, and industry evolution were compared through a seventeen-question survey. Results showed that course content was successful at increasing sustainability awareness at both overall and individual sustainability pillar levels, At the end, 100% of students were able to develop complete understanding of various modern management techniques and stated that they felt confident to apply learnt skills to real life issues within their profession upon graduation. Overall, this study empirically documented how synergies between Lean, Sustainability, Six-Sigma and Life Cycle Assessment concepts outweigh their divergences, demonstrated viability of SBT Framework and presented a proven example of modern management techniques powered transdisciplinary sustainability curriculum.</a>