Abstract
Despite global attention to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, efforts to meet them remain insufficient. This study examines how professionals working in international sustainability roles understand and articulate the concept of sustainable development. Drawing on longitudinal qualitative research with 20 participants, including interviews and a visual mapping technique, the study reveals a shared reliance on widely adopted models, such as the SDGs and the Triple Bottom Line. While these models offer structure, they often limit alternative thinking by promoting a future-focused and human-centered narrative. This can restrict possibilities for broader, more immediate shifts. The analysis identifies three major issues within these prevailing interpretations: a tendency to postpone sustainability as a long-term aim instead of addressing it as a present-day necessity; an emphasis on human priorities that overshadows ecological perspectives; and an approach that favors globally uniform solutions shaped by dominant cultural and institutional norms, particularly those from WEIRD societies. Rather than promoting transformation, these patterns may contribute to ongoing stagnation. The paper advocates for replacing the current model with more flexible, inclusive, and locally grounded approaches that prioritize ecological relationships and practical action. The findings aim to open new directions for thinking and acting on sustainability beyond conventional frameworks.