Can the growth/sustainability circle be squared?

What does 'sustainability' mean to you? The more time I spend with IT vendors, the more I wonder if they see it as something for other people.

To quote from the frequently-cited Brundtland Report: "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."

Lots of companies pay lip service to that but, somehow, it always results in them making more things for us to buy. It's as if they've had trouble getting to grips with the 'needs' part of 'meet the needs of the present'. Do we ever ask what we really 'need' in order to stay afloat in the today's complicated world?

Of course, IT does have the potential to address the 98% of carbon emissions (say) that are not attributable to IT operations. Many manufacturers tell a good tale. They speak of reuse of components in future products, of their adherence to this and that regulation and, especially, of how the application of more IT will help cut someone else's environmental footprint.

In the end, though, there's no hiding the fact that they're still hooked on growth. Understandable, by the way. And while they could possibly achieve this through services, the global vendors see hundreds of millions of souls in developing countries as fine prospects for more 'things', even if they are made of fewer and more easily recycled materials.

Perhaps, by getting in early enough with IT equipment as a travel or printing substitute, for example, these vendors can help the developing countries avoid some of the excesses of the West. Frankly, I'm not optimistic, but I'd love to be proved wrong.