SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
8:48 AM
Posted by
Indira
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Meaning of sustainable development
Until four decades ago,we were interested only in economic
growth.i.e increasing the incomes of the people. But the lives of the people were seriously
affected by the environmental consequences of development based on economic
growth alone. People began to suffer
from environmental problems due to air and water pollution, waste management, deforestation and a variety of other effects which
seriously affected people’s wellbeing and health. Theoretically,
the long-term result of environmental
degradation is the
inability to sustain human life. Such degradation on a global scale could imply
extinction for humanity.
By 1970’s most development specialists began to recognize that economic growth alone could not bring about a better way of life unless environmental conditions are improved. For this purpose there is the need for a strategy of development that will not destroy environment and support the well being and quality of life of the people in the world today and that of the future generation. This new concept of development is known as sustainable development. Sustainable development implies economic growth together with protection of environmental quality. To ensure sustainable development, an economic activity that is expected to bring about economic growth, must also consider its environmental impact so that it is more consistent with long term growth and development.
Sustainable development concept emerged largely from the forces generated by the “limits-to-growth” debate of the early 1970s. The limits-to-growth debate was ignited by the findings of the so-called Club of Rome Report (Meadows et al., 1972). This controversial and widely publicised report involved an in-depth study of the environmental and resource limits to growth and the potential role of technological change in removing such limits. The report concluded that if the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years. The most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity. In keeping with its findings, the Club of Rome condemned what it considered to be the reckless growth orientation of the many policies and programmes implemented by both governments and international development agencies.
The concept of sustainable development received its first
major international recognition in 1972 at the UN Conference on the Human
Environment held in Stockholm. The term was not referred to explicitly, but
nevertheless the international community agreed to the notion - now fundamental
to sustainable development - that both development and the environment, hitherto
addressed as separate issues, could be managed in a mutually beneficial way.
The term sustainable development was brought into common use fifteen years later by the World Commission on Environment and Development( WCED) in its report ‘ Our Common future” published in 1987. The report is often referred to as Brundtland report after its chair Gro Harlem Brundtland who had previously been both the Minister for Environment and the Prime Minister of Norway. The report provides much information about sustainability problem, identifying a number of constraints on future economic growth and arguing that current trends cannot be continued in future. The commission defined sustainable development as development that “ seeks to meet the needs and aspirations of the present without compromising the ability of the future generation to meet their own needs”. It contains within it two key concepts: the concept of 'needs', in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs.
This definition emphasizes on intra generation equity as well as inter generation equity. Development implies enhancement of living conditions of all generations. For this purpose the use of resources should be designated over generations. Therefore sustainable development involves achieving equity both within generations(intra generation) and equity across generations( inter generation). The present generation has a moral obligation to hand over the environment in a good condition to the future generation.
Sustainable
development requires that the present generation should promote
development that :
1.Conserves natural
assets,offsetting any unavoidable reduction by compensating increase so that the
stock does not decrease.
2.Preservation of the
regenerative capacity of the world’s eco system.
3 .Achieving greater social equality
4.Avoiding the imposition of added costs on succeeding
generations.
Sustainable
development is thus the rational management of human, natural, and economic
resources that aims to satisfy the essential needs of humanity in the very long
term. It seeks to achieve social and economic progress in ways that will not
exhaust the earth’s finite natural resources. The needs of the world today
are real and immediate, yet it’s necessary to develop ways to meet these needs that
do not disregard the future.
Closely associated with the concept of
sustainable development is the notion of
carrying capacity. Sustainability is improving the quality of human life while
living within the carrying capacity of supporting eco-systems.
Carrying capacity
Carrying
capacity refers to the maximum number of organisms of a particular species that can be supported
indefinitely in a given environment
without significant negative impacts to
the given organism and its environment. Below carrying capacity, populations
typically increase, while above, they typically decrease. The carrying capacity
of an environment may vary for different species and may change over time due
to a variety of factors, including: food availability, water supply, environmental
conditions and living space.
Components
sustainability
The
three basic components of sustainable development are:
1. Economic sustainability
2. Social
sustainability.
3.
Environmental sustainability
Economic sustainability
Economic sustainability or economic development implies that
societies should pursue a growth path that generates optimum flow of income
while maintaining their stock of man made capital, human capital and nature
capital. An economically sustainable system must be able to produce goods and
services on a continuing basis, to maintain manageable levels of government and
external debt, and to avoid extreme sectoral imbalances which damage
agricultural or industrial production.
Social sustainability
Social sustainability implies that wealth ,resources, and
opportunity should be equitably shared. All citizens should have equal
opportunities for education, access to minimum standards of security, health,
shelter ,opportunities for self development, gender equity etc. Thus social
sustainability is built on the twin principles of justice and equality.
Environmental
sustainability
Environmental
sustainability requires sustainable resource use, efficient sink function and
maintenance of stock of natural capital. An environmentally sustainable system
must maintain a stable resource base avoiding over-exploitation of renewable
resource systems or environmental sink functions, and depleting non renewable
resources only to the extent that investment is made in adequate substitutes.
This includes maintenance of biodiversity, atmospheric stability, and other
ecosystem functions not ordinarily classed as economic resources.
The United Nations 2005 World Summit Outcome Document refers to the "interdependent and mutually reinforcing pillars" of sustainable development as economic development, social development, and environmental protection. When the concepts contained in the three spheres of sustainability are applied to real world situations, natural resources are preserved, the environment is protected, the economy is not harmed, and the quality of life for our people is improved or maintained. As development process becomes sustainable, the three components converge. as shown in the figure below
The United Nations 2005 World Summit Outcome Document refers to the "interdependent and mutually reinforcing pillars" of sustainable development as economic development, social development, and environmental protection. When the concepts contained in the three spheres of sustainability are applied to real world situations, natural resources are preserved, the environment is protected, the economy is not harmed, and the quality of life for our people is improved or maintained. As development process becomes sustainable, the three components converge. as shown in the figure below
Another way of looking at this concept of sustainable development involves considering three legged stool where each leg respectively represents one of the basic elements – economic vitality, ecological integrity and social equity. If one of the stool leg is removed, the stool falls over - emphasizing the importance of all three legs in maintaining the upright position of the stool, as equally all the three elements are important for satisfying the sustainable development objectives.
The Universal Declaration on
Cultural Diversity (UNESCO, 2001)
further elaborates the concept by including cultural diversity as the
fourth pillar of sustainable development
stating that "...cultural diversity is as necessary for humankind as
biodiversity is for nature”; it becomes “one of the roots of development,
understood not simply in terms of economic growth, but also as a means to achieve a more satisfactory
intellectual, emotional, moral and spiritual existence". In this vision,
cultural diversity is the fourth policy area of sustainable development.
Rules of sustainable development
Rules of
sustainable development refers approaches to operationalise and implement sustainable development.
The Hartwick rule
Hartwick assumes that possibilities of substitution between
nonrenewable resource and man made capital in a way that depleting these natural
resources does not harm future generation . According to this rule as the stock of oil is depleted, the stock of man made capital is built up to
replace it. So, as the non renewable resource is depleted, the man made capital
is accumulated, output and consumption will remain constant over time. Thus in spite of the
exhaustibility of natural resources, substitutability between natural and
man made capital, may allow for equitable consumption for all generations, and
Hartwick seemed to have found the investment policy that would bring about
sustainability. .Hartwick subscribe to
weak sustainability definition.
Unfortunately for the validity of this rule, very strong
assumptions are required. i.e the resources are extracted efficiently over time
and that sufficient substitutability exits between non renewable resource and
man made capital. But all these conditions are not met in practice. Hence the
practical usefulness of this rule is very limited. Nevertheless for countries dependent on such wasting assets, this rule offers
a prescription for sustainable development
Non declining capital stock approach
A group of economists from London School of Economics, David Pearce, Giles Akinson and Kerry Turner , held the view that development is sustainable if nation’s stock of capital is non declining through time.There are two variants of the rule:
A group of economists from London School of Economics, David Pearce, Giles Akinson and Kerry Turner , held the view that development is sustainable if nation’s stock of capital is non declining through time.There are two variants of the rule:
Weak sustainability rule
Strong sustainability rule
Weak sustainability
rule
Weak sustainability rule requires that total capital stock is
non declining through time. The total capital stock consists of physical, human
and natural capital. Physical capital or man made capital is machines, tools ,
buildings etc. Human capital is our knowledge or skills that are used for
productive means. Natural capital is the stock of natural resources . A further
categorization of “natural capital” is “renewable resources” and “non renewable
resources. Weak sustainability rule will hold
if there is perfect substitutability between different forms of capital.
But nature capital cannot be substituted for man made capital.e.g. the life
support services of the environment cannot be replaced by man made capital
Strong sustainability
rule
Strong sustainability rule requires that the country’s
natural capital stock is non declining through time. Non declining natural capital stock is a necessary condition
for sustaining the country’s productive potential. Akinson and Pearson pointed out that some
part of the natural capital stock providing valuable non substitutable environmental s. ervices such
as life support services cannot be substituted at all. Such natural capital is
called critical natural capital. So
they modified the concept of strong sustainability .The modified version of
strong sustainability requires non declining critical natural capital stock
overtime. The critical natural capital should be held constant overtime to
bring about sustainable development
.
Safe Minimum Standards Approach.(SMS approach)
Safe Minimum Standards Approach.(SMS approach)
The
safe minimum standards approach to the conservation of renewable resources was
first proposed by Ciracy- Wantrup ( 1952) and Bishop (1978,
1993).
The safe minimum standards approach is closely linked to the non declining
natural capital stock approach. The rule is to prevent reductions in the
natural capital stock below a safe minimum standard identified for each
component of capital stock, unless the social opportunity cost of doing so is
unacceptably large. As a collective
choice rule the SMS approach is to preserve some minimum level or safe standard
of a renewable resource unless the social cost of doing is excessive or
intolerably high. The utilization of natural resources beyond certain threshold
or critical zone would lead to irreversible losses to the economic system .So
the exploitation of natural resource should not go beyond the safe minimum
standard. The SMS approach originates from decision making under uncertainty.
The society is deemed to be unsure about the future.
The key
difference between the SMS approach and the critical natural capital approach
is that, under the former, the SMS for any resource type is allowed to be
breached if society deems the opportunity costs of preserving the SMS to be
unacceptably high. Under the latter, however, no consideration is given to the
costs of protecting the critical natural capital stock, which is to be
preserved regardless of any cost consideration.
But the problem with SMS approach is how to identify
the SMS levels. It is a matter of moral and
social obligation to define such standards. Hence it is extremely fuzzy
whenever the impact of such standards
goes beyond maximum opportunity cost, such a choice should be abandoned. It is also difficult to identify the unacceptably large real
opportunity cost of preservation. Hanely and others says that it should be
arrived at by consensus or through democratic process.
Daly's Operational rules
Herman E. Daly laid out in his 1971 opus "The Entropy
Law and the Economic Process"suggests the following three operational
rules defining the condition of ecological (thermodynamic) sustainability:
1. Harvesting rate of renewable resources such as fish, soil, and groundwater should
not exceed regeneration rates.
2. Nonrenewable resources such as minerals and fossil fuels
must be exploited at a rate which is equal to the creation of renewable substitutes.
3.Pollution and wastes must be kept at or below the capacity of
the nature to absorb them.
Some commentators have argued that the "Daly
Rules", are the most straightforward system for operationalization of the
Bruntland Definition. In this view, the Bruntland definition and the Daly Rules
can be seen as complementary—Bruntland provides the ethical goal of
non-depletion of natural capital, Daly details parsimoniously how this ethic is
operationalized in physical terms. The system is rationally complete, and in
agreement with physical laws. Dally’s rule suggests efficiency in using
renewable resources, while managing the the waste systematically. In a way this
rule bridges the gap between efficiency in production process and externality
Indicators of
sustainability
Indicators are signposts that
can point the way to sustainable development. Indicators provide early warning
about non-sustainable trends of economic
activity and
environmental deterioration. They can also support policy formulation and
evaluation. Indicators can
help to measure and calibrate progress towards sustainable development goals. Indicators
at varying length seek to capture the different – economic, environmental,
social and institutional – dimensions of sustainable development. They provide
an overview of national progress towards a more sustainable economy, society
and environment. The Sustainable development indicators proliferated in the
wake of the 1992 Rio Earth Summit’s call for indicators of sustainable
development .The Earth Summit recognized
the important role that indicators can play in helping countries to make informed decisions
concerning sustainable development. This recognition is articulated in Chapter
40 of Agenda 21 which calls on countries at the national level, , as well
as international governmental and non
governmental organizations to develop and identify indicators of
sustainable development that can provide a solid basis for decision making at
all levels.
The Index of Sustainable Economic
Welfare (ISEW)
The ISEW was originally developed in 1989 by Herman Daly and John B. Cobb. It is one of the most advanced attempts to create an
indicator of economic welfare. They have proposed the Index of Sustainable
Economic Welfare as an alternative to country’s Gross National Product or Gross
Domestic Product. ISEWs have been
developed out of the concern that GNP is not an adequate indicator for either current
welfare or the achievement of sustainability, which is usually defined as the
capacity to provide non-declining future . The Index of Sustainable Economic
Welfare is roughly defined by the following formula:
ISEW = personal
consumption + public
non-defensive expenditures - private
defensive expenditures + capital
formation + services from
domestic labour - costs of
environmental degradation - depreciation
of natural capital
ISEW is an attempt to measure the portion of
economic activity which delivers genuine increases in our quality of life. For
example, it makes a subtraction for air pollution caused by economic activity,
and makes an addition to count unpaid household labour . It also covers areas
such as income inequality, other environmental damage, and depletion of
environmental assets. A rising path of ISEW overtime indicates that the economy
is becoming more sustainable and a falling path indicates the opposite.
Genuine Progress Indicator( GPI )
Herman Daly and John
B. Cobb, later went on to add several other "costs" to the definition
of ISEW. This later work resulted yet another macroeconomic indicator known as
Genuine Progress Indicator. The GPI is an extension of ISEW, that
stresses genuine and real progress of the society and seeks especially to
monitor welfare and the ecological sustainability of the economy. The ISEW and
GPI summarizes economic welfare by means of a single figure according to same
logic, as GDP summarizes economic output into a single figure. Beside economic
issues, social and environmental issues in monetary terms are included
Since 1990 the Human Development Index (HDI) is reported
annually as part of the Human Development Programme. It consists of three
(equal weighted) sub-indices which are aggreg ated by an arithmetic mean: Life
Expectancy Index, Education Index (decomposed into an Adult Literacy Index and
a Gross Enrolment Ratio Index), and a GNP Index. The HDI has a strong focus on
the social dimension of Sustainable development
While the HDI represents a distinct improvement over income
figures as a measure of human well-being, it so far says nothing about
environmental degradation. As a result, the HDI can rise through gains in
literacy, life expectancy, or purchasing power that are financed by the
depletion of natural resources, setting the stage for a longer term
deterioration in living conditions.
The Human Development Index, measured on a scale of 0 to 1. The
2013 Human Development Report by the United Nations Development Program was
released on March 14, 2013, shows that the "very high human
development" countries are Norway( 0.955 )
, Australia
(0.9380), United States (0.937), Netherlands
(0.921), Germany (0.920). India ranked the country at a low 136 among 186 countries on its human
development index , with its index standing at 0.554.
Ecological Foot
print Measure( EFM )
Ecological Foot print is the most popular method of measuring
strong sustainability. It was conceived
in 1990 by Mathis Wackernagel and William Rees at the University of British
Columbia. Ecological footprint is defined as the aggregate area of land and
water that is used up by economic agents to produce consumer goods and absorb
wastes using prevailing technology. This analysis compares the aggregate
footprint with the biosphere's ability to regenerate resources and provide
services. Often, the word ‘footprint’ is used generically to refer to human
impact on the planet. In the World
Wide Fund (WWF) for nature’s regular reporting of the ecological footprint (
WWF 2004), is divided into three main categories: a food, fiber and timber
footprint, an energy footprint and a footprint of built -up land. For each
included country the footprint is then compared with its biological capacity. The
difference between the two is the ecological deficit or surplus – a measure of
whether a country sustainable or not.
Ecological footprint is expressed in "global
hectares" (gha) or "global acres" (ga), which are standardized
units that take into account the differences in biological productivity of
various ecosystems impacted by consumption activities. The ecological footprint of a person is calculated by considering all of the biological materials
consumed, and all of the biological wastes generated, by that person in a given
year. All of these materials and wastes are then individually translated into
an equivalent number of global hectares. The sum of the global hectares needed
to support the resource consumption and waste generation of the person gives
that person’s total Ecological Footprint.
EFM was published every two years by the WWF in the Living
Planet Report. The EFM was calculated
back to 1961 ,when it was estimated to have been 0.49 times the global biocapacity. It has steadily
increased since then and became 1.5 in 2007.This implies that resource usage is
not sustainable and earth’s resources are being depleted at an alarming rate. The
world-average ecological footprint in 2007 was 2.7 global hectares per person.
The average per country ranges from over 10 to under 1 hectares per person.
There is also a high variation within countries, based on individual lifestyle
and economic situation. Unlike other criteria, EFM does not incorporate
economic indicators, but assumes that humanity is responsible for exceeding the
world’s bio capacity. EFM helps to manage resources more wisely and take
personal and collective action to support a world, where humanity
lives within the earth’s bounds.
Since 1970’s humanity has been in an ecological overshoot.
Turning resources into waste faster than waste can be turned back into resource
leads to ecological overshoot, depleting the very resource on which human life
and biodiversity depends. . The result of the overshoot is collapsing
fisheries, diminishing forest cover, depletion of fresh water systems, and the
build up of carbon dioxide emissions, which creates problems like global
climate change. These are just a few of the most noticeable effects of overshoot.
Thus the overshoot is vastly understood as a threat to human wellbeing and health of the environment. Moderate UN
scenarios suggest that if current population and consumption trends continue,
by the 2030s, we will need the equivalent of two Earths to support us. But we
only have one. Overshoot also contributes to resource conflicts and wars, mass
migrations, famine, disease and other human tragedies—and tends to have a disproportionate
impact on the poor,
who cannot buy their way out of the problem by getting resources from somewhere
else
Genuine Savings
indicator
Genuine Savings indicator first suggested by Pearson and
Akinson( 1993) measures national savings net of depreciation of both manmade
capital and natural capital.The following equation defines the standard version of the
indicator.
GSt
= St – DMt - DNt
Where GSt stands for genuine savings indicator in
year t, St is the gross
domestic savings, DMt is the depreciation of manmade capital
, and DNt is the depreciation of natural capital.The world bank has
published such an indicator annually since 1999.A positive genuine savings
indicator suggests that the country is
on sustainable path. A negative value indicates that the country is on unsustainable path.This indicator is usually
presented as a percentage of national GDP.This is a weak sustainability
indicator.
The
Environmental Sustainability Index ( ESI )
The Environmental Sustainability Index was launched in 1999 by Professor Daniel C. Esty in cooperation with Columbia University's Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) and the World Economic Forum's Global Leaders for Tomorrow Environment Task Force. The (ESI) was a measure of overall progress towards environmental sustainability. The Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI) was a composite index published from 1999 to 2005 that tracked 21 elements of environmental sustainability covering natural resource endowments, past and present pollution levels, environmental management efforts, contributions to protection of the global commons, and a society's capacity to improve its environmental performance over time. Thus it is a composite index tracking socio-economic, environmental, and institutional indicators that characterize and influence environmental sustainability at the national scale. The high the country’s ESI score, the better positioned it is to maintain favorable environmental conditions.
The Environmental Sustainability Index was launched in 1999 by Professor Daniel C. Esty in cooperation with Columbia University's Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) and the World Economic Forum's Global Leaders for Tomorrow Environment Task Force. The (ESI) was a measure of overall progress towards environmental sustainability. The Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI) was a composite index published from 1999 to 2005 that tracked 21 elements of environmental sustainability covering natural resource endowments, past and present pollution levels, environmental management efforts, contributions to protection of the global commons, and a society's capacity to improve its environmental performance over time. Thus it is a composite index tracking socio-economic, environmental, and institutional indicators that characterize and influence environmental sustainability at the national scale. The high the country’s ESI score, the better positioned it is to maintain favorable environmental conditions.
The 2005 ESI report, published at the World Economic Forum’s Annual Meeting in
Davos, Switzerland, ranked 146 countries with regard to the environmental
sustainability of their past, current, and projected socio-economic and
institutional development trajectories. The five highest ranking countries are,
Finland, Norway, Uruguay, Sweden and Iceland. All these countries have
substantial natural resource endowment and low population. Low ranking
countries are North Korea, Taiwan, Turkmenistan, Ubekistan. These countries
face a number of issues ,both natural and manmade and may not managed their policy choices well.
The
ESI had, helped to demonstrate new conceptual hypotheses concerning the drivers
of successful environmental protection. ESI
covers the whole range of aspects of sustainable development in its broad
context. However, the Gender-Related Index is absent in the ESI and Good
Governance receives only minor attention.
The
Green Net National Product or the Environmentally Adjusted Net Domestic Product
The Green Net National Product or the Environmentally
Adjusted Net Domestic Product (EDP) has been developed within the scope of SEEA
(System of Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting – UNEP, 2000 and UN
et al., 2003). Following inter alia Hanley (2000) three different versions of
the EDP can be distinguished : (i) the EDPI : which subtracts depreciations of
natural resources caused by their extraction from the national income (NNI),
(ii) the EDPII, which subtracts from the NNI the costs necessary to reach the
same state of the environment at the end of the period as existed at the
beginning of the period, and (iii) the EDPIII, which subtract s the costs of
environmental pressure and destruction (calculated by will ingness-to-pay
methods). Again aggregation takes place by simply adding up monetised values.
Well being Index ( WI )
Well being Index was set by by Robert
Prescott-Allen in 2001, in cooperation with international Union for
Conservation of Nature and International Development Research Centre.Prescott
Allen defined sustainability ( which he said is just another way of saying the
good life) as a combination of high level of human wellbeing and high
level of ecosystem wellbeing that supports it. A high level of human
wellbeing is essential because no one wants to sustain a low standard of
living. A high level of ecosystem wellbeing is just as essential because ecosystem
supports life and makes possible any standard of living. The necessity of both
is illustrated by the metaphor of the Egg of Wellbeing.The eco system
surrounds and supports people much as the white of an egg surrounds and
supports its yolk .Just as an egg is good if the white and yolk are good, a
society can be well sustained only if both the people and the ecosystem are
well.Therefore any measure of wellbeing must reflect this interdependence.
Prescott work has yielded four indices
The Human Wellbeing Index ( HWI )
The Ecosystem Wellbeing Index (EWI )
The Wellbeing Index (WI ) combining HWI and EWI and thus measuring sustainability and
The Wellbeing / Stress Index ( WSI ) how much harm a given country's development. These four indices provide a measure of sustainable development.
Human Wellbeing Index (HWI)
Human wellbeing is a condition in which all members of society are able to determine and meet their needs and have large range of choices to meet their potential.Human well being consists of five dimensions.
Human wellbeing is a condition in which all members of society are able to determine and meet their needs and have large range of choices to meet their potential.Human well being consists of five dimensions.
How long people may expect to live in good health [1
indicator]. The stability of family size [1 indicator].
Wealth
How well needs are met for income, food, safe water, and sanitation [6 indicators]. The size and condition of the national economy, including inflation, unemployment, and the debt burden [8 indicators].
Knowledge and culture
Education (primary, secondary, and tertiary school enrollment rates) and communication (accessibility and reliability of the telephone system and use of the Internet) [6 indicators]. Lack of a suitable indicator prevented coverage of culture.
Community
Freedom and governance (political rights, civil liberties, press freedom, and corruption) [4 indicators]. Peacefulness (military expenditure and deaths from armed conflicts and terrorism) [2 indicators]. Violent crime rates [4 indicators].
Equity
Household equity: the difference in income share between the richest and poorest fifths of the population [1 indicator]. Gender equity: disparities between males and females in income, education, and parliamentary decision-making [3 indicators].
he HWI is a more realistic measure of socioeconomic
conditions than narrowly monetary indicators such as the Gross Domestic Product
and covers more aspects of human wellbeing than the United Nations’ Human
Development Index. It is the average of the above 36 indicators of socio
economic conditions.
Ecosystem Wellbeing Index (EWI)
Ecosystem wellbeing is a condition in which ecosystem
maintains its quality and diversity-and thus its capacity to support people and
the rest of life -and its potential to adapt changes and to provide a wide
range of choices and opportunities for future.Prescot Allen said that ecosystem
wellbeing is more than low resource consumption as well as more than the sum of
a nation's environmental policies and practices. ( as measured by environmental
sustainability index.According to Prescott eco system well being also has
five dimensions.
Land
How well a country conserves the diversity of its natural land ecosystems [4 indicators] and maintains the quality of the ecosystems that it develops [1 indicator].
Water
River conversion by dams [2 indicators]. The water quality of drainage basins [17 indicators]. Water withdrawal as a percentage of the national supply from precipitation [1 indicator]. Inadequate data prevented coverage of the sea.
Air
Emissions of greenhouse gases and ozone depleting substances to the global atmosphere [2 indicators]. The quality of city air [9 indicators].
Species and genes. How well a country conserves its wild species of mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, and higher plants [2 indicators], and the variety of its domesticated livestock breeds [2 indicators].
Resource use
How much energy a country consumes [2 indicators]. The demands its agriculture, fishing, and timber sectors place on resources [9 indicators
The EWI is an equally broad measure of the state of the environment, with a fuller and more systematic treatment of national environmental conditions than other global indices such as the Ecological Footprint and the Environmental Sustainability Index. It is the average of the above 51 indicators.
HWI consists of 36 indicators and EWI consists of 56 indicators.All indicators are scaled in 0-100 ,where 0 is the worst performance and 100 is the best performance of an indicator.Then scores are computed by a straightforward aggregation.
Emissions of greenhouse gases and ozone depleting substances to the global atmosphere [2 indicators]. The quality of city air [9 indicators].
Species and genes. How well a country conserves its wild species of mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, and higher plants [2 indicators], and the variety of its domesticated livestock breeds [2 indicators].
Resource use
How much energy a country consumes [2 indicators]. The demands its agriculture, fishing, and timber sectors place on resources [9 indicators
The EWI is an equally broad measure of the state of the environment, with a fuller and more systematic treatment of national environmental conditions than other global indices such as the Ecological Footprint and the Environmental Sustainability Index. It is the average of the above 51 indicators.
HWI consists of 36 indicators and EWI consists of 56 indicators.All indicators are scaled in 0-100 ,where 0 is the worst performance and 100 is the best performance of an indicator.Then scores are computed by a straightforward aggregation.
The wellbeing index published in 2001 for 180
countries revealed that Sweden, Finland, Norway and Iceland got the first four scores and Iran,Syrian Arab
Republic,Afganistan and Uganda got the lowest wellbing index score.
Wellbeing Index(WI )
WI is expressed as the average of human wellbeing index and ecosystem wellbeing index.This index helps socities to identify the main obstacles to sustainability and devise strategies to overcome them
Wellbeing /Stress Index ( WSI )
WSI is the ratio of human wellbeing to ecosystem stress. (opposite of ecosystem wellbeing ).It shows how much harm a soociety does to the environment for its level of development.
Barometer of sustainability
The “Barometer of Sustainability” tool was developed by various specialists linked to two institutes, The World Conservation Union (IUCN) and The International Development Research Centre (IDRC), being Prescott-Allen the main researcher involved in its development.
Barometer of sustainability is the performance scale that measures human and ecosystem wellbeing together without submerging one in another. The performance score ranges between 0-100 making it readily comprehensible to a wide range of lay people.Its two axes are one for human wellbeing and the other for ecosystem wellbeing.Each axis is divided is into 5 bands.The five bands of the barometer of sustainability are
Band scores
Bad 1- 20
poor 21- 40
Medium 41-60
Fair 61-80
Good 81-100
Wellbeing index is the point on the barometer of sustainability where HWI and EWI intersect.
Wellbeing Index(WI )
WI is expressed as the average of human wellbeing index and ecosystem wellbeing index.This index helps socities to identify the main obstacles to sustainability and devise strategies to overcome them
Wellbeing /Stress Index ( WSI )
WSI is the ratio of human wellbeing to ecosystem stress. (opposite of ecosystem wellbeing ).It shows how much harm a soociety does to the environment for its level of development.
Barometer of sustainability
The “Barometer of Sustainability” tool was developed by various specialists linked to two institutes, The World Conservation Union (IUCN) and The International Development Research Centre (IDRC), being Prescott-Allen the main researcher involved in its development.
Barometer of sustainability is the performance scale that measures human and ecosystem wellbeing together without submerging one in another. The performance score ranges between 0-100 making it readily comprehensible to a wide range of lay people.Its two axes are one for human wellbeing and the other for ecosystem wellbeing.Each axis is divided is into 5 bands.The five bands of the barometer of sustainability are
Band scores
Bad 1- 20
poor 21- 40
Medium 41-60
Fair 61-80
Good 81-100
Wellbeing index is the point on the barometer of sustainability where HWI and EWI intersect.
 |
| Prescott Allen (1995) |
EPI was developed by Columbia University and Yale
University, USA.It was published in 2006 in order to present a better insight
into the ‘environmental dimension’ of the Millennium Development Goals. EPI
ranks how well countries perform on high priority environmental issues, protection
from environmental harm and protection of the
ecosystem. It is constructed through the
calculation and aggregation of 21 indicators reflecting national-level
environmental data. These indicators are combined into nine issue categories.
These nine issues are categorized into
two headings: Environmental health and
ecosystem vitality. Issues under environmental health include, health impact,
environmental quality, water quality, water and sanitation. The issues under
ecosystem vitality consist of water
resources, agriculture, Forests, fisheries, biodiversity and habitat, climate
and energy. The higher the score the better the environmental performance of
the country
In the 2014 EPI ranking, the top five countries were Switzerland, Luxembourg ,Australia, Singapore and Czech
Republic .The bottom five countries were Afganistan, Lesotho, Haiti, Mali,
Somalia. The United Kingdom was ranked in 12th place, Japan 26th
place, , the United State 33th, hina 118th, and India
came in 155th.
Environmental Space Measure ( ESM )
This
measure of sustainable development is associated with Schmidt - Bleet. ESM is essentially concerned with
fairness of resource use in any country. Fairness in resource use is measured
by comparing the per capita resource use in any country with that of the world
average use of that resource in the production of goods. The resource chosen
for the measure are renewable resources – arable land, forestry, and water
resources
Mafatt
has criticized the ESM on the following grounds.
1.
It is difficult to specify the maximum and minimum permissible use rate for
resources.
2.
Selection of resources to be included is arbitrary.
3.
Resources may have double use. Therefore the problem of double of double
counting may arise. Hence it is of no use for policy makers.
Happy planet Index ( HPI)
Calculated
by the New Economic Foundation, which was established by The Other Economic
Summit (TOES) of leaders other than G8.
HPI = Life
satisfaction x Life expectancy
Ecological Footprint
HPI scores rank between 0
and 100.It covered 177 countries. Higher score indicates better performance.
Life satisfaction is a subjective measure
The global biodiversity indicator Living Planet Index was developed by WWF (1998). It measures trends in over 2000 populations of more than 1100 species of vertebrates in terrestric, freshwater, and seawater ecosystems . The LPI provides a sub-index for the three spheres: For every species within a sphere, the ratio between its populations in pairs of consecutive years is calculated. The geometric mean of these quotients of different species multiplied with the index value of the former year then delivers the biodiversity index for the respective sphere (1970 serves as a base-year with the index value for 1970 scaled to unity). The geometric mean of these indices is the LPI. As all variables are in changes of numbers of species no normalization is accomplished and all ratios are equally weightage.
Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI)
Living Planet Index (LPI)
The global biodiversity indicator Living Planet Index was developed by WWF (1998). It measures trends in over 2000 populations of more than 1100 species of vertebrates in terrestric, freshwater, and seawater ecosystems . The LPI provides a sub-index for the three spheres: For every species within a sphere, the ratio between its populations in pairs of consecutive years is calculated. The geometric mean of these quotients of different species multiplied with the index value of the former year then delivers the biodiversity index for the respective sphere (1970 serves as a base-year with the index value for 1970 scaled to unity). The geometric mean of these indices is the LPI. As all variables are in changes of numbers of species no normalization is accomplished and all ratios are equally weightage.
The Living Planet Report 2014 points out that the population size of vertibratespecies-mammals,birds,reptiles amphibians and fish have declined by 52 percent over the last 40 years. In otherwords those poulations around the globe have dropped more than half in fewer than two human generations
At the same time our demands on nature are unsustainable and increasibg.We need 1.5 Earths to regenerate the natural resources we currently ues: we cut trees faster than they mature, harvest fish more than oceans replenish and emit carbon into the atmosphere than forests and oceans absorb
Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI)
The Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI) compromises 32 indicators of
hazards, 8 indicators of resistance, and 10 indicators that measure damage.
The EVI scale for normalization ranges between a value of 1 (indicating
high resilience / low vulnerability) and 7 (indicating low resilience / high
vulnerability). The 50 indicators are given equal weights and then aggregated
by an arithmetic mean.
City Development Index (CDI)
The CDI
was developed for the Second United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) in
1996 and measures the level of development in cities.It has separate
sub-indices for Infrastructure, Waste Management, Health, Education, and City
Product, which are averaged to form the CDI. Each sub-index is a combination of
several indicators that have been normalized to give a value between 0 and 1.
Because the variables used to make up the CDI are strongly related to each
other, there are a number of ways to calculate the CDI that give almost
identical results. For this report, the weightings given to each indicator have
been initially calculated by a statistical process called Principal Components
Analysis and then simplified. This formulation of the index by and large uses
the same formulae as in UNDP Human Development Report (1999), for the Health,
Education and City Product sub-indices.
CSD indicators
This set developed by
the UN Commission on The UN Commission on Sustainable Development ( CSD)is
published annually since 2003. The set comprises 14 themes, 44 sub-themes, 50
core indicators, and 46 other indicators. The set offers much information.
However, some of the indicators are hardly, or not at all, related to
sustainability, like GDP, ODA and Tourism. Some indicators are missing,
like the important Gender Equality and
Sufficient F Food, while others are only partly included (Good Governance,
International Cooperation, Waste Recycling).
The
overall conclusion is that none of the existing indexes seem to fit our needs
completely In other words, not one gives a complete and good insight into all
relevant aspects of sustainability in a transparent, simple and easily
understandable way, showing at a glance to what extent a society is sustainable
or not. So a new index has to be developed, based on a set of indicators in
accordance with the definition of Brundtland
New
Set of Indicators
These indicators are
clustered in 5 categories, following the elaboration of the Brundtland +
definition
I.Personal Development
1 Healthy Life
2 Sufficient Food
3 Sufficient to Drink
4 Safe Sanitation
5 Education Opportunities
6 Gender Equality
II. Clean Environment
7 Air Quality
8 Surface Water Quality
9 Land Quality
III. Well-balanced Society
10 Good Governance
11 Unemployment
12 Population Growth
13 Income Distribution
14 Public Debt
IV.Sustainable Use of Resources
15 Waste Recycling
16 Use of Renewable Water
Resources
17 Consumption of
Renewable Energy
V Sustainable World
18 Forest Area
19 Preservation of
Biodiversity
20 Emission of Green house
gases
21 Ecological footprint
22 International co
operation
These 22 indicators and 5
categories constitute the newly proposed Sustainable Society Index , the SSI - 2006
Environmental Vulnerability Index
(EVI)
The Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI) compromises 32
indicators of hazards, 8 indicators of resistance and and 10 indicators that
measure damage. The EVI scale for normalization ranges between a value of 1
(indicating high resilience / low vulnerability) and 7 (indicating low
resilience / high vulner). The 50 indicators are given equal weights and then
aggregated by an arithmetic mean.
United Nations initiatives for sustainable development
The theoretical
framework for sustainable development evolved between 1972 and 1992 through a
series of international conferences and initiatives. The UN Conference on the Human Environment,
held in Stockholm in 1972 was the first major international gathering to
discuss sustainability at the global scale. The conference created considerable
momentum, and a series of recommendations led to the establishment of the UN
Environment Programme (UNEP) as well as the creation of numerous national
environmental protection agencies at the national level. The recommendations
from Stockholm were further elaborated in the 1980 World Conservation Strategy
- a collaboration between the International Union for the Conservation of
Nature, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), and UNEP which aimed to advance
sustainable development by identifying priority conservation issues and key
policy options.
In 1983, the UN convened the WCED,
chaired by Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland to address growing concern over the “accelerating
deterioration of the human environment and natural resources and the
consequences of deterioration for economic and social development.” Four years
later, the group produced the land mark publication “Our Common Future"
(or the Brundtland report) that provided a stark diagnosis of the state of
environment. The report popularized the most commonly used definition of
sustainable development. “Development that meets the needs of current
generation without compromising the ability of the future generation to meet
their own needs”.
The Brundtland
report provided the momentum for the landmark 1992 Rio Summit that laid the
foundation for the global institutionalization of sustainable development.
Marking the twentieth anniversary of the Stockholm conference, ,the Earth Summit adopted the Rio
Declaration on Environment and Development
and Agenda 21, a global plan of action for sustainable development. The
Rio Declaration contained 27 principles of sustainable development. Agenda 21
included 40 separate chapters, setting out actions in regard to the social and
economic dimensions of sustainable development, conservation and management of
natural resources, the role of major groups, and means of implementation. In
Agenda 21 developed countries reaffirmed their commitments to reach the
accepted UN target of contributing 0.7 percent of their annual gross national
product (GNP) to official development assistance, and to provide favourable
access to the transfer of environmentally sound technologies, in particular to
developing countries
Three seminal
instruments of environmental governance were established at the Rio Summit: the
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Convention on
Biological Diversity (CBD), and the non legally binding Statement of Forest
Principles. Following a recommendation in Agenda 21, the UN General Assembly
officially created the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) later that
year. The Rio Summit was very successful from a political standpoint: it had
the world’s attention and active engagement and attendance by virtually every
national leader. Its challenges lay in two areas: first, too much of an
emphasis on the “environment pillar” in the negotiations and secondly, all too
little implementation of goals established under Agenda 21, particularly those
related to development aid and cooperation
Since that time a
number of important international conferences on sustainable development have
been held including the 1997 Earth Summit+5 in New York and the 2002 World
Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg. These meetings were
primarily reviews of progress; and reported that a number of positive results
had been achieved, but implementation efforts largely had been unsuccessful at
the national and international level.The The WSSD did make a constructive
change by focusing considerably more attention on development issues,
particularly in integrating the MDGs with sustainable development principles
and practices. since
the Rio Summit, sustainable development has found its most prominent “hook”
around the issue of climate change. Responses to address climate change, both
mitigation and adaptation, are linked to sustainable development.
Nonetheless,
sustainable development has been integrated into the operations and governing
mandate of many prominent international organizations. These include the World
Bank (2010), which has affirmed a commitment to “sustainable globalization”
that “enhances growth with care for the environment”; the International
Monetary Fund (IMF, 2010), with a
commitment to “sustainable economic growth”; as well as the World Trade
Organization (WTO, 2010) which endeavours to contribute to sustainable
development through the pursuit of open borders and the removals of barriers to
trade.
Millennium Development Goals ( MDGS)
The UN Millennium Declaration was
adopted in 2000 and committed countries to reach eight Millennium Development
Goals by 2015. The eight goals included:
Halving extreme poverty
Halting the spread of HIV/AIDS
Providing universal primary education
Eliminating gender disparity in education
Reducing the under five mortality rate,
Reducing the maternal mortality rate and achieving universal access to reproductive health
Developing a global partnership ( to address the needs of the poorest countries to further an open non discriminatory trade system, and to deal with developing country debt);
Ensuring environmental sustainability (by integrating sustainable development into country policies and programmes, reducing biodiversity loss, improving access to safe reducing biodiversity loss, improving access to safe , reducing biodiversity loss, improving access to safe reducing biodiversity loss, improving access to safe drinking water and sanitation, and improving the lives of slum dwellers)
Halting the spread of HIV/AIDS
Providing universal primary education
Eliminating gender disparity in education
Reducing the under five mortality rate,
Reducing the maternal mortality rate and achieving universal access to reproductive health
Developing a global partnership ( to address the needs of the poorest countries to further an open non discriminatory trade system, and to deal with developing country debt);
Ensuring environmental sustainability (by integrating sustainable development into country policies and programmes, reducing biodiversity loss, improving access to safe reducing biodiversity loss, improving access to safe , reducing biodiversity loss, improving access to safe reducing biodiversity loss, improving access to safe drinking water and sanitation, and improving the lives of slum dwellers)
The 2030 Agenda for sustainable development
The 193 member UN General Assembly on September 25,2015 formally adopted the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development.along with bold new global goals. The formal adoption of the new framework" Transforming our world."
The 2030 agenda for sustainable development is composed of 17 goals and 169 targets to wipe out poverty, to fight inequality, to protect the planet, tackle climatic change and ensure prosperity for all. over the next fifteen years. At the heart of the agenda are the the sustainable development goals which clearly define the world we want -applying to all nations and leaving no one behind.The Agenda is a plan of action for the people,planet, peace and prosperity.
The 2030 agenda for sustainable development is composed of 17 goals and 169 targets to wipe out poverty, to fight inequality, to protect the planet, tackle climatic change and ensure prosperity for all. over the next fifteen years. At the heart of the agenda are the the sustainable development goals which clearly define the world we want -applying to all nations and leaving no one behind.The Agenda is a plan of action for the people,planet, peace and prosperity.
People
The agenda seeks to end poverty and hunger in all their forms and dimensions and to ensure that all human beings can fulfill their potential in dignity and equality and in a healthy environment.
Planet
The 2030 agenda resolve to protect the planet from degradation,including through sustainable consumption and production,sustainably managing natural resources and taking urgent action on climatic change so that it can meet the needs of the present and future generation.
Prosperity
The agenda resolves to ensure that all human beings can enjoy prosperous and fulfilling lives and that economic social and technological progress occurs in harmony with nature.
Peace
The agenda resolves to foster peaceful, just and inclusive societies which are free from fear and violence. There can be no sustainable development without peace and no peace without sustainable development.
Prosperity
The agenda resolves to mobilise the means required to implement the agenda through a revitalised partnership for sustainable development ,based on a spirit of strengthened global solidarity,focused in particular on the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable and with the participation of all countries,all stakeholders and all people.
The 17 sustainable development goals
The 17 sustainable development goals to transform our world are:
1 .No poverty
2. Zero hunger
3. Good health and wellbeing
4. Quality education
5. Gender equality
6 .Clean water and sanitation
7. Affordable and clean energy
8. Decent work and economic growth
9. Industry,innovation and infrastructure
.
.
10. Reduced inequalities.
11. Sustainable cities and communities
12. Responsible consumption and production
13. Climatic action
14. Life below water
15.Life on land
16. Peace justice and strong institutions
17. Partnership for goals.
The sustainable development goals provide powerful aspirations for improving our world.These goals seek to build on the Millennium Development Goals and complete what these did not achieve.They are integrated and and indivisible and balance the three dimensions of sustainable development: economic ,social and environmental..T
-------------------------------------------
Comments (0)
Post a Comment