Five key sustainable development indicators: a tool for public education and awareness raising

Main Article Content

Svatava Janoušková http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3803-7055 Bedřich Moldan http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7219-206X Tomáš Hák http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5271-4687

Abstract

Sustainable Development strategy is going to celebrate its 30th anniversary this year (1987). Despite its long existence it is a concept very little understood globally and causing public sentiment just at a small part of population. The article thinks about the causes and ways to improve it. It is indicators that have an underused potential for presentation sustainability principles and ideas. The sustainability indicators may serve as informative, educational and public enlightenment tools and assist in understanding of the whole concept – an instrumental condition for its embracing. The article defines general qualities of the indicators, as inter alia thematic relevance and indicator relevance, and proposes a set of five key indicators representing all dimensions of sustainable development: People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace and Partnership.

Article Details

How to Cite
Janoušková, S., Moldan, B., & Hák, T. (2017). Five key sustainable development indicators: a tool for public education and awareness raising. Envigogika, 12(1). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.14712/18023061.536
Section
Reviewed Papers
Author Biographies

Svatava Janoušková

Charles UniversityEnvironment Centre

Bedřich Moldan

Charles UniversityEnvironment Centre

Tomáš Hák

Charles UniversityEnvironment Centre

References

1. Angle, P.M. (Ed). (1991). The Complete Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Auerswald, P. (2011). The coming prosperity: How entrepreneurs are transforming the global economy. Oxford University Press.
3. Batt, S. (2009). Human attitudes towards animals in relation to species similarity to humans: a multivariate approach. Bioscience Horizons 2 (2), pp. 180 - 190.
4. Bate, R. (2009). What Is Prosperity and How Do We Measure It?. AEI Development Policy Outlook, (3).
5. Beder, S. (2000). Costing the Earth: Equity, Sustainable Development and Environmental Economics, New Zealand Journal of Environmental Law, 4, pp. 227-243.
6. Blomqvist, L.; Brook, B.W.; Ellis, E.C.; Kareiva, P.M.; Nordhaus, T.; et al. (2013). The ecological footprint remains a misleading metric of global sustainability". PLOS Biology, 11 (11).
7. Boos, A. (2015). Genuine Savings as an Indicator for „Weak“ Sustainability: Critical Survey and Possible Ways forward in Practical Measuring. Sustainability. 2015/7, pp. 4146 – 4182.
8. Boushey, G. (2010). Policy Diffusion Dynamics in America. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
9. Bunge, M. (1975). What is quality of life indicator? Soc. Indic. Res. 2(1), 65-79.
10. Bunge, M. (2003). Philosophical Dictionary, Enlarged Edition. Amherst, New York : Prometheus Books.
11. Caplan, K., Jones, D. (2002). Partnershipindicators - Measuring the effectiveness of multi-sector approaches to service provision. Practitioner Note Series.
12. Costanza, R.; Fisher, B; Ali, S. et al. (2007). Quality of life: An approach integrating opportunities, human needs, and subjective well-being. Ecological Economics.
13. Costanza, R.; Hart, M.; Posner, S; Talberth,J. (2009). Beyond GDP: The Need for New Measures of Progress. The Paradee Papers/No. 4/ January 2009. Boston University.
14. DEI (2016). Country Case Study: Germany: SDG Preparedness with a focus on Policy Coherence. Revised draft from 18. April 2016. Available at:http://www.fairpolitics.eu/doc/DIE_Germany%20Case%20Study_Draft.pdf
15. EC (2002). The World Summit on Sustainable Development: People, planet, prosperity. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
16. The Economist (2016). How to measure prosperity. Available at: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21697834-gdp-bad-gauge-material-well-being-time-fresh-approach-how-measure-prosperity) (cited December 2016).
17. Fiala, N. (2008). Measuring sustainability: Why the ecological footprint is bad economics and bad environmental science. Ecological Economics 67, pp. 519 - 525.
18. Fleurbaey, M., Kartha, S., Bolwig, S., Chee, Y. L., Chen, Y., Corbera, E., Lecocq, F., Lutz, W., Muylaert, M. S., Norgaard, R. B., Okereke, C. and Sagar, A. D. (2014). Sustainable Development and Equity. In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
19. Frick, K.F., Weinzimmer, D., Waddell, P. (2015). The politics of sustainable development opposition: State legislative efforts to stop the United Nation’s Agenda 21 in the United States. Urban Studies, Vol. 52(2) p. 209–232.
20. Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation, 2016. Indicators and targets. Available at: http://effectivecooperation.org/monitoring-country-progress/explore-monitoring-data/ (cited December 2016)
21. Hák, T., Kovanda, J., Weinzettel, J. (2012a). A method to assess the relevance of sustainability indicators: Application to the indicator set of the Czech Republic’s Sustainable Development Strategy. Ecological Indicators 17: 46-67.
22. Hák, T.; Janoušková, S., Abdallah, S., Seaford, Ch., Mahony, S. (2012b) Review report on Beyond GDP indicators: categorisation, intensions and impacts. Final version of BRAINPOoL deliverable 1.1, A collaborative project funded by the European Commission under the FP7 programme (Contract no. 283024). CUEC Prague, 18 October 2012.
23. Hák, T., Janoušková, S., Moldan, B. (2016). Sustainable development goals: A need for relevant indicators. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 60, pp. 565-573.
24. Hanley, N.; Dupuy, L.; McLaughlin, E. (2014). Genuine Savings and Sustainability. Discussion Papers in Environmental Economics Paper 2014-09. University of St. Andreas.
25. IAEG (2016). Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1), Annew IV. Available at: http://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/Official%20List%20of%20Proposed%20SDG%20Indicators.pdf
26. Ikeme. J. (2003). Equity, environmental justice and sustainability: incomplete approachesin climate change politics. Global Environmental Change 13, pp. 195–206.
27. Jackson, T. (2009). Propserity without Growth. Economics for Finite Planet. London: Earthscan.
28. Janoušková, S.; Hák, T.; Moldan, B. (Eds.) Analýza relevance cílů udržitelného rozvoje pro Českou republiku. Úřad vlády ČR, Centrum pro otázky životního prostředí UK. (Výzkumná zpráva).
29. Kaly, U.L., Pratt, C.R., Mitchell, J. (2004). The Demonstration Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI) 2004. SOPAC Technical Report 384, 323 pp.
30. Kates, R. W., Parris, T.M., Leiserowitz, A. A. (2005). What is Sustainable Development: Goals, Indicators, Values and Practice. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, Vol. 47 (3), pp. 8–21.
31. LeDoux, J. (1996). The emotional brain. New York: Simon and Schuster.
32. Léle, S.; Jayaraman, T. (2011). Equity in the context of sustainable develoopment (Version 2.0). Prepared at the request of Mr. Jairam Ramesh, Minister for environment and forest, India.
33. McCann, K. (2011). Is the government's sustainable development definition good enough? Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/local-government-network/poll/2011/sep/28/poll-sustainable-development-nppf-definition (cited December 2016).
34. McDonnell, I., Lecomte, H.-B., Wegimount, L. (2003). Public Opinion Research, Global Education and Development Cooperation Reform: In Search of a Virtuous Circle, Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
35. MZV (2010). Koncepce zahraniční rozvojové spolupráce ČR na období 2010-2017.
36. Neumajer, E. (1999a). Weak versus Strong Sustainability Exploring the Limits of Two Opposing Paradigms. 4th ed., Edward Elgar Publishing , Cheltenham, UK.
37. Neumayer, E. (1999). The ISEW: not an index of sustainable economic welfare. Social indicators research, 48 (1), pp. 77-101.
38. Neumayer, E. (2004). Sustainability and Well-being Indicators. Research Paper No. 2004/XX, WIDER, UN University.
39. OECD (2013). OECD Guidelines on Measuring Subjective Well –being. OECD Publishing.
40. OECD (2016). Better Life Initiative: Measuring Well-Being and Progress. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/statistics/better-life-initiative.htm (cited December 2016).
41. Paxton, P., Knack, S. Individual and country-level factors affecting support for foreign aid. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series.
42. Petrie, J. (2007). Educating For Sustainable Development: A Foundation Document. New Brunswick Education for Sustainable Development Working Group.
43. Pillarisetti, J. R. (2005). The World Bank's ‘genuine savings’ measure and sustainability. Ecological Economics 55(4), pp. 599-609
44. Riddell, R. (2007). Does Foreign Aid Really Work?, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
45. Roodman, D. (2004). The Commitment to Development Index: 2004 edition. Washington, DC: Center for Global Development.
46. Royce, A. (2004). A definition of peace. Peace and Conflict Journal of Peace Psychology 10(2):101, pp. 101-116.
47. Spencer, H., Lindstrom, J., Haddad, L., Mulmi, R. (2010). Public Perceptions of International Development and Support for Aid in the UK: Results of a Qualitative Enquiry. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.
48. Stakeholders Forum for Sustainable Future (2012). Review of implementation of Agenda 21 and the Rio Principles. Synthesis.
49. Syrovátka, M. (2008). Jak (ne)měřit kvalitu života. Kritické pohledy na index lidského rozvoje. Mezinárodní vztahy, Vol 43 (1), pp. 9-37.
50. UN (2002). Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development. A/CONF.199/20. Johannesburg, South Africa, 26 August- 4 September 2002. UN: New York.
51. UN (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015, A/RES/70/1.
52. UNDP (2016). Human Development Report 2015. Available at: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2015_human_development_report_1.pdf (cited December 2016).
53. UNECE (2016). Sustainable development - concept and action. Available at: (http://www.unece.org/oes/nutshell/2004-2005/focus_sustainable_development.html) (cited December 2016).
54. van den Bergh, J. C. J. M; Grazi, F. (2014). Ecological Footprint Policy? Land Use as an Environmental Indicator. Journal of Industrial Ecology. 18 (1): 10–19.
55. van den Bergh, J. C. J. M; Antal. M. (2014). Evaluating Alternatives to GDP as Measures of Social Welfare/Progress. MS211 “Research paper on evaluating alternatives to GDP as measures of Social Welfare and Progress” Working Paper No. 56
56. Vlková, I. (2009). Efektivnost rozvojové pomoci jako prostředek pro zvýšení dopadu official development assistance. Acta economica pragensia, 1/2009
57. WB (2016). PovcalNet: an online analysis tool for global poverty monitoring (online). Available at: http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/home.aspx (cited December 2016).
58. WB (2016b). Adjusted savings: net national savings (% of GNI) Available at: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.ADJ.NNAT.GN.ZS (cited December 2016).
59. WCED (1987). Our Common Future. World Commission on Environment and Development, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
60. Wiedmann, To.O, Schandl, H.; Lenzen, M.; Moran, D.; Suh, S., West, J., Kanemot, K. (2015). The material footprint of the nations. PNAS, 112 (20), pp. 6271 – 6276.
61. Weitz, N.; Persson, Å.; Nilsson, M.; Tenggren, S. (2015). Sustainable Development Goals for Sweden: Insights on Setting a National Agenda. Stockholm: Stockholm Environment Institute.
62. Wolfe, P. (2001). Brain Matters: Translating research into classroom practice. USA: ASCD.
63. World Economic Forum (2016). The Global Risks Report 2016 (11th Edition). Swizerland, Geneva.
64. WWF (2016). Living planet report 2016. Risk and resiliance in a new era. WWF International, Gland: Switzerland.
65. YCELP (2016). Global Metrics for the Environment: The Environmental Performance Index ranks countries’ performance on high-priority environmental issues. Yale University, Columbia University, World Economic Forum.