Wilson MC, Wu J. 2016. The problem of weak sustainability and associated indicators. Int J Sust Dev World. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2015.1136360
When the above article was first published, Section 4 contained three errors, which are listed below:
The “Absurdly Strong” column of utilized an aggregation method from a previous version of the manuscript. The below version of now reflects the aggregation method described in the text and reflected in Figures 1 and 2.
The arbitrarily selected threshold values used to calculate the strong sustainability index were social = 0.2, economic = 0.5, and environmental = 0.4, not social = 0.2, economic = 0.4, and environmental = 0.5 as mentioned in Section 3.2.
Arong Banner was incorrectly labeled Xinbaerhu Left Banner throughout.
Table 3. The resulting sustainability indices when calculated according to the tenets of weak, strong, or absurdly strong sustainability. Threshold values used for strong sustainability were social = 0.2, economic = 0.5, and environmental = 0.4.
This has now been corrected in both the print and online versions.