Unsustainable sustainability

With the increasing use of the term "sustainability" in development discourse and international and local support projects, fundamental questions arise about the realism of this concept, particularly in the complex political, economic, and social context of Palestine. Although "sustainability" is presented as a key principle for ensuring the sustainability of projects' impact and reducing dependence on donors, the reality points to a clear paradox, epitomized by the phrase that has become commonplace in field circles: "Sustainability is not sustainable."

In Palestinian development discourse, almost no project paper or international or local intervention strategy is devoid of the term "sustainability." It's presented as a magic solution for ensuring lasting impact, reducing dependence on donors, and enhancing local responsibility. But when we descend from rhetoric to reality, we encounter a harsh paradox: most projects marketed as "sustainable" either disappear after funding runs out, become a burden on local communities, or fail to effect any change, keeping the situation in a state of perpetual need.

Multiple studies and critical reviews indicate that sustainability, as presented in Palestinian development projects, does not stem from a fundamental analysis of local needs or limited sovereignty. Rather, it responds to funder requirements, market logic, and quick results. Implementing agencies are required to produce a "viable model," without providing a legal and economic framework that truly fosters this sustainability. Consequently, effective long-term planning is absent in favor of superficial and rapid achievements. Many projects become temporary initiatives that are discontinued when funding ends, reflecting a reality that illustrates the contradiction between lofty slogans and practical reality, especially in contexts such as development, projects, or public policy.

What do we mean by sustainability? Are our projects truly "sustainable"? What's the difference between "linguistic sustainability" and "actual sustainability"?

Within the workshops, and at the top of each project document, the golden word “sustainability” adorns the titles, promoting us as the magic solution (limited funding + short-term plan = long-term impact).

Reality, as most of us have come to know, is something else entirely. True sustainability doesn't come from an "output report" or an "end-of-project evaluation sheet." Sustainability begins when society is asked, "What do you want?" and when programs are built on people's trust, not the desires of funders. But all too often, they turn into an administrative illusion, wrapped in resonant words, expiring with the last funding installment. How many initiatives launched in the name of women were halted before reaching them? How many entrepreneurial, environmental, or youth programs were promoted as a "model for sustainable development," only to disappear without a trace? We are facing a phenomenon called "sustainability is not sustainable," where sustainability is merely rhetorical decoration, not actual practice. This is not just criticism; it is a call to stop... Let us redefine "sustainability" with the voices of women, the patience of female workers, and the will of communities.

First: Sustainability as a linguistic trap. Sustainability, as presented in most projects, is not an actual concept stemming from a Palestinian context. Rather, it is a hollowed-out version of its content, presented within donor terms such as exit strategy or value for money. Since conditional funding is the main tool in projects, any "sustainability" that does not take into account the structure of the occupation, the constraints of sovereignty, and the reality of geographical fragmentation is an illusory sustainability.

Second: Financing. "Sustainability" is often linked to a project's ability to "generate income" or "be self-reliant," without considering the conditions of the distorted Palestinian market, which is subject to Israeli control, resource restrictions, and unfair customs and tax policies. If the economic structure itself is not independent, how can we talk about sustainable projects? This approach reproduces the logic of neoliberalism: the withdrawal of the state, the dismantling of public responsibility, and the burden of continuity being placed on individuals.

Third: At the expense of women and marginalized groups, women's "economic empowerment" projects are often presented under the rubric of sustainability, but they do not address the structural causes of poverty or marginalization. Training or small-scale support is funded, and then women are asked to "maintain the project" without a protective legal structure, a fair market, or social protection. Thus, sustainability becomes a responsibility imposed on marginalized and vulnerable groups, rather than a systematic commitment by the state and society.

Fourth: The lack of governance and follow-up at the institutional level. There are no clear standards for measuring sustainability in the Palestinian public or civil society sectors. Most projects end with formal evaluation reports, with results not subject to in-depth analysis, and lessons learned not capitalized on. Policies are not reviewed, nor are programs modified based on impact. Instead, the same models are recycled.

Financing gap and economic reality

They call us a "sustainable project," but we discover that it's "sustainable, not sustainable." Where did the plan go? Where did the resources go? And the idea died when the funding ran out.

Many programs promoted under the banner of "sustainability" ignore the Palestinian economic context, which is based on occupation, control of resources, recurrent closures, and geographical dispersion. How can any local project be "sustainable" under these circumstances? And how can communities be held responsible for maintaining projects without actually empowering them? These questions open the door to critiquing prevailing development policies, which empty "sustainability" of its sovereign and just dimensions.

Women and marginalized and vulnerable groups are the first to be affected by "economic empowerment" programs. The burden of sustainability after the project ends is often placed on them, even though they still suffer from structural gaps in access to finance, markets, legal protection, and decent work. There are many cases of women's initiatives that ceased completely immediately after the funding period ended, leaving no institutional footprint or protection.

Social or serious follow-up, thus transforming "sustainability" from a support tool to an additional burden, and from a slogan to an actual commitment. Overcoming this reality requires redefining sustainability from a national and comprehensive perspective, taking into account the elements of sovereignty, social justice, and community ownership of programs.

What do we want? Towards true sustainability. From a slogan to a practical commitment. "Sustainability, not sustainability" is not just a sarcastic phrase; it is an accurate description of the structural condition we experience daily in Palestine. If we want to overcome this trap, we must move from consuming terminology to developing solutions based on understanding reality, not embellishing it.

To achieve this, there is a need to.

- Unconditional funding that is built around and takes into account real local community priorities.

- Real community partnerships start from the grassroots, not the donor.

- Real accountability for project outcomes and their actual sustainability, not just their money.

- A legal and economic structure that enables women and vulnerable groups to continue without dependence.

- Promoting the concepts of solidarity and social economy as sustainable alternatives.

- Activating the roles of the state and society, not withdrawing from them.

- Supporting the legislative structure to protect women, entrepreneurs, and vulnerable groups.

Sustainability is not just a nice word, it is not just funding, sustainability is a commitment, and a responsible discourse.

Sustainability is not just a clause in a project proposal, but a long-term commitment whose effectiveness is measured by what remains after each phase. If this sustainability is not linked to just national policies and a genuine capacity for resilience, we will continue to repeat the same pattern: "Sustainability is not sustainable."

True "sustainability" is not just a clause in a project proposal, or a "production line" within a project. Rather, it is a long-term commitment whose effectiveness is measured by what remains after each phase concludes, and by the people's ability to build what remains after everyone has departed. It is the result of a comprehensive national planning logic that links political and economic sovereignty and restores consideration for the public role. If this sustainability is not linked to just national policies and a genuine capacity for resilience, we will continue to repeat the same pattern: "unsustainable sustainability."