16.02, Segalas — Lecture on indicators

Erasmus Mundus Action 4 project
“Promoting European Education in Sustainable Development”
TEMPUS Joint European Project_ 25163_ 2004
“Bridging the gap between University and businesses”
Course SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
NTUU “KPI”, 12-23 February 2007

Indicators for sustainability Assessment

Professor Jordi Segalas
Technology and Sustainable Development
Polytechnic University of Catalonia
Barcelona, SPAIN


1. Use of indicators

2. Many many indicators

3. GPI - GDP
Contents
4. Ecological Footprint


Uses of indicators:
• to measure progress - eg. GDP/capita
• to measure efficiency - eg. ‘productivity’
• to communicate, to stimulate urgency and
commitment - eg. ‘Environmental footprint’
• to stimulate action - eg. by quantifying impact


Using the right Indicators is vital to
moving to sustainability..
• “If I can’t measure it, I can’t manage it”
• But be careful not to go down this road:
• “Step 1. Measure what can be easily measured - This is OK
as far as it goes
• Step 2. Disregard that which can’t be easily measured, or
give it an arbitrary quantitative value - This is artificial and
misleading
• Step 3. Presume that which can’t be measured easily
really isn’t important - This is blindness
• Step 4. Say that what can’t be easily measured really
doesn’t exist - This is suicide”
• Adapted from C.Handy-The Empty Raincoat: Making sense of the Future
(1994)


Many many indicators….


http://mdgs.un.org/unsd


The GPI starts with the same
personal consumption data the GDP
is based on, but then makes some
crucial distinctions.
• adjusts for certain factors (such
as income distribution)
• adds certain others (such as the
value of household work and
volunteer work)
• subtracts yet others (such as the
costs of crime and pollution)
Because the GDP and the GPI are
both measured in monetary terms,
they can be compared on the same
scale.


What's Wrong with the GDP as a Measure of Progress

Since its introduction during World War II as a measure of wartime production
capacity, the GDP has become the nation's foremost indicator of economic
progress. It is now widely used by policymakers, economists, international
agencies and the media as the primary scorecard of a nation's economic health
and well-being.
It is merely a gross tally of products and services bought and sold, with no
distinctions between transactions that add to well-being, and those that
diminish it.
Instead of separating costs from It is as if a business tried to assess
benefits, and productive activities its financial condition by simply
from destructive ones, the GDP adding up all quot;business activity,quot;
assumes that every monetary thereby lumping together income
transaction adds to well-being by and expenses, assets and liabilities
definition.


What's Wrong with the GDP as a Measure of Progress

I. GDP Treats Crime & Natural Disasters as Economic Gain
II. GDP Ignores the Nonmarket Economy of Household & Community
III. GDP Treats the Depletion of Natural Capital as Income
IV. GDP Increases with Polluting Activities & Again with Clean-Ups
V. GDP Takes No Account of Income Distribution
VI. GDP Ignores the Drawbacks of Living on Foreign Assets


Monetary benefits (ignored by GDP) included in GPI:

1. Value of time spent on household work, parenting, and volunteer work.

2. Value of services of consumer durables (such as cars and refrigerators)

3. Services of highways and streets


GPI subtracts of expenses that’s do not improve well-being:

1. Defensive expenditures, defined as money spent to maintain the
household's level of comfort, security or satisfaction, in the face of
declines in quality of life due to such factors as crime, auto accidents
or pollution. (water filters, locks or security systems, cost of repainting
houses damaged by air pollution,…)

2. Social cost, such as the cost of divorce, crime or loss of leisure time.

3. Depreciation of environmental assets and natural resources, including
loos of land, reduction of stocks of natural resources and damaging
effects of wastes and pollution.


GPI versus GDP as a Measure of Progress


ECOLOGICAL
FOOTPRINT.
WHAT?
&
WHY?


Introduction
• In Rio-92 Conference it was showed the need of reducing
the impacts of human beings to the environment.

If we can not measure, we can not manage.
If we can measure it does not implies that we can
manage…. But it’s the firs step… by me

• New indicators of sustainability:
– Ecological Footprint: Land surface needed to support a
community.
– Ecological Rucksack: Total weight of the material flow needed
for the production of a specific good in all its life cycle.


What is Ecological Footprint?

• It’s defined as the surface of productive
land and water necessaries to support an
specific economy or population within an
specific standard of living.

Origin: Concept ideate by William Rees from the British Columbia
University.


What does the EF measure?
• Consumption of food and materials: in relation to the surface of earth and seas
biologically productive needed to produce that natural resources.
• Consumption of energy: on the basis of the surface necessary to absorb the
correlatives emissions of CO2.

• The measuring is done in “units of surface”. A surface’s unit is equivalent to an hectare of
world productivity average.


How is the EF evaluated?
Consumption patterns Land patterns & its use
1. Housing. Use Patterns
2. Transport.
Surface to absorb the
3. Consumption Energy Fossil energy
CO2 emissions
goods.
4. Alimentation. Consumption Construction Degraded Surface
5. Services. Agricultural
Reversible surface
growing

Use Cereals Growing ecosystems

Pastures
Modified ecosystems
Forestry running

Virgin woods Natural ecosystems
Unusable
No productive Desserts and polar
lands lands

Evaluation Matrix
A C F
Ecological Footprint B D E
Fossil Agricultural Forestry TOTAL
[ha/capita] Degradation Cereals Pastures
energy growing running
1 ALIMENTATION
11 Vegetables
12 Animal
2 HOUSING
21 Construction
22 Operation
3 TRANSPORT
31 Private
32 Public
33 Of products
4 CONSUMPTIN GOODS
41 Packing
42 Clothing
43 Furniture
44 Books/Journals
45 Tobacco/Alcohol
46 Personal care
47 Recreational
equipment
48 Others
5 SERVICES
51 Government + Army
52 Education
53 Health
54 Social Services
55 Tourism
56 Culture
57 Banking/Financing
58 Others Course SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
TOTAL NTUU “KPI”, 12-23 February 2007

Example: Canada
A C F
Ecological Footprint B D E
Fossil Agricultural Forestry TOTAL
[ha/capita] Degradation Cereals Pastures
energy growing running
1 ALIMENTATION 0.33 0.02 0.60 0.33 0.02 1.30
11 Vegetables 0.14 0.02 0.18 0.01
12 Animal 0.19 0.42 0.33 0.01
2 HOUSING 0.41 0.08 0.002 0.40 0.89
21 Construction 0.06 0.35
22 Operation 0.35 0.05
3 TRANSPORT 0.79 0.10 0.89
31 Private 0.60
32 Public 0.07
33 Of products 0.12
4 CONSUMPTIN GOODS 0.52 0.01 0.06 0.13 0.17 0.89
41 Packing 0.10 0.04
42 Clothing 0.11 0.02 0.13
43 Furniture 0.06 0.03
44 Books/Journals 0.06 0.10
45 Tobacco/Alcohol 0.06 0.04
46 Personal care 0.03
47 Recreational equipment 0.10
48 Others 0.00
5 SERVICES 0.29 0.01 0.30
51 Government + Army 0.06
52 Education 0.08
53 Health 0.08
54 Social Services 0.00
55 Tourism 0.01
56 Culture 0.01
57 Banking/Financing 0.00
58 Others 0.05
TOTAL 2.34 0.20 0.02 0.66 0.46 0.59 4.27


Global values Informe Living planet 2004

• World availability per capita: 1.8 units
• Word consumption 2,2 units =>
22% higher than availability

Local values Informe Living planet 2004

• There are distinguished high and low biological
capacity areas in order to show the regions with
an “ecological lack”.


Local Ecological Footprint,
Available 5

Available 4

Available 3

Available 2

Available


LA
SE SP NL Ukraine


Global values Informe Living planet 2000

• World availability per capita: 1.8 units
• Word consumption 2,2 units =>
22% higher than availability

Local values Informe Living planet 2000

• There are distinguished high and low biological
capacity areas in order to show the regions with
an “ecological lack”.


Regional Ecological Footprint, 1996 Living planet
Inform 2000

HE Available Excess
Area remarks
Ut/persona Ut/persona Ut/persona
OCDE 7.22 3.42 -3.8
Ecological Debt!!!
No OCDE 1,81 1,82 0.1
Africa 1.33 1.73 0.4 Surplus due to the generalized poverty

Latinamerica
Latin + Carib
2.46 6.93 3.93 High biological availability

Low biological availability.
Middle East +
Central Asia
2.73 0.91 -1.82 Higher shortage in the richer petrol
economies.
Asia & Pacific 1.78 1.11 -0.67 Huge amount of population

North America 11.94 -5.64 Maximum deficit although having the
6.3
(USA) (12.9) (-6.6) second biological availability

Occidental Second world deficit
Europe
6.28 2.93 -3.35 Higher in UK, Switzerland and Denmark
Central & Oriental
Europe
4.89 3.14 -1.75 Maximum in Txequia & Estonia.

World 2.85 2.18 -0.67 30%

Ecological Footprint evolution


Evolution of the Global Ecological Footprint


Four factors make up the ecological debt;therefore, debt
reduction requires policies and actions that lead to:
1. Increasing biocapacity by protecting, conserving, and
restoring ecosystems and biodiversity, to maintain
biological productivity and ecological services.
2. Lowering world population.
3. Reducing per person consumption of goods and
services.
4. Improving the resource efficiency with which goods
and services are produced.

The following actions will help create a society where all people live well,
within the capacity of one planet.
1. Improving information for decision making by
• Providing better quality and quantity of information in the media.
Governments and companies will not receive appropriate signals from citizens
and consumers unless the public is well informed.
• Presenting responsible and accurate product information so that
consumers are not misled by advertising.
• Encouraging wide use of corporate environmental reporting to show which
companies are making efforts to become sustainable, and how.
• Supporting public information and education campaigns on sustainability
challenges and opportunities covering issues such as climate change, forests,
and fisheries.
• Asking governments to measure and report on more comprehensive
indicators of social, economic, and ecological performance to complement
existing economic measures like GDP, trade balance, and rate of inflation.
• Encouraging full cost pricing for all goods and services from energy to
water. NTUU “KPI”, 12-23 February 2007

2. Advancing product design and urban infrastructure by
• Making transport pricing reflect the full social and environmental costs of
road and air travel, and encouraging public transport.
• Implementing comprehensive waste reduction systems which include
municipal resource reuse and recycling, and give priority to preventing the
release of hazardous substances.
• Introducing building design requirements that lead to reductions in waste
generation and energy use.


3. Using markets and regulation by
• Providing incentives for financial markets to favour long-term
sustainability over short-term gains. Pension funds and insurance
companies in particular have opportunities to invest in ecologically
responsible ways and divest their interests in unsustainable activities.
• Allowing governments to adjust market frameworks and provide regulatory
and fiscal incentives to become less resource intensive and minimize waste.
• Creating incentives for promoting renewable energy and energy efficiency
technologies.


4. Enhancing international cooperation by
• Pressuring governments to move from short-term national self-interests to
long-term global common interests. In a global economy, governments
rarely engage in unilateral action on international issues such as climate
change, biodiversity conservation, or management of the oceans. International
conventions and treaties encourage equitable solutions to sustainability
challenges.


As Meadows et al. (2004) suggest in Limits to Growth: The 30-Year
Update:

“We don’t think a sustainable society need be
stagnant, boring, uniform, or rigid. It need
not be, and probably could not be, centrally
controlled or authoritarian. It could be a
world that has the time, the resources, and the
will to correct its mistakes, to innovate, to
preserve the fertility of its planetary
ecosystems. It could focus on mindfully
increasing the quality of life rather than on
mindlessly expanding material
consumption…”.

Which is my Ecological Footprint?

• http://www.myfootprint.org/
• http://www.lead.org/leadnet/footprint/intro.htm
• http://www.bestfootforward.com/footprintlife.htm
• http://www.educ.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/438/environment/
webstuff/footprint.html
• http://www.environment.govt.nz/footprint/personal.html
• http://www.epa.vic.gov.au/Eco-footprint/Calculator.asp


Conclusions

• The EF is a tool to measure:
• The unsustainability of our society.
• The unfair sharing out of resources.
• The unit of measure makes it ease to
understand by citizenship.


du chemin du développement quot;classiquequot; aux
chemins du développement durable
: chemin du développement quot;classiquequot;
Besoins des
générations : chemins du développement durable
actuelles
Indicateur de développement humain –IDH)
1
/5 /3
0,9 développement durable
0,8
0,7
les « chemins »
0,6 souhaitables diffèrent
mais tentent de susciter
0,5 une convergence à long
0,4 terme écologiquement
viable et politiquement
0,3 acceptable.

0,2
0,1
0 Besoins des
générations
11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
futures
Empreinte écologique (ha/hab)
d’après Aurélien Boutaud, ENSMSE, RAE C. Brodhag, http://www.brodhag.org

http://sustainabilityindicators.org


16.02, Segalas — Lecture on indicators

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (17)

Similaire à 16.02, Segalas — Lecture on indicators

Similaire à 16.02, Segalas — Lecture on indicators (20)

Plus de WDC_Ukraine

Plus de WDC_Ukraine (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

16.02, Segalas — Lecture on indicators