One of the most common definitions of sustainability comes from the 1987 World Commission on Environment and Development where sustainable development was defined as meeting “the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” The concept of sustainability has significantly advanced since then to include relationships between social, economic, and ecologic resources, but the fundamental goal of encouraging enduring processes has remained.
McHarg identifies many biotic forms that have endured, such as the shapes or birds, sharks, shells, or more complex forms such as cellular structure and DNA strands. These forms are examples of species or processes that continue to exist because they have evolved to be suitable for the context in which they exist. This idea is similar to what the geodesign process attempts to achieve. Geodesign seeks contextual understanding in order to make educated decisions about what changes will be suitable and thus be enduring changes. Further, by observing the forms and shapes present in a place, we can make a logical shortcut from what exists to what perhaps should exist.
Suppose you observe a crab on the beach. If the crab’s shell is shaped in a certain pattern, you can safely assume it is shaped that way for a reason. Especially if it appears as though many crabs share similar shell shapes. We do not need to necessarily understand the science or history to see that something is suitable (though it may help us to understand why). By understanding the cultural and geographic context of a place, especially the forms that have proven to be suitable, we can better inform enduring and sustainable decisions. Changes that are suitable are more likely to endure, or be sustainable. McHarg refers to this idea as how well an object “fits,” or its fitness. Geodesign provides a structured process for informing sustainable decisions and encourages fitness.