Bulletin UASVM Horticulture, 66(2)/2009 Print ISSN 1843-5254; Electronic ISSN 1843-5394 Indicators and Policies of Sustainable Development in the European Union Mircea Adrian GRIGORAS University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine, 3-5 Manastur St., Cluj-Napoca 400372, Romania; magrigoras@yahoo.com; mgrigoras@usamvcluj.ro Abstract. This article proves the importance of regular screening of the indicators for sustainable development in order to achieve the fundamental objective meeting the needs of present generations without diminishing the possibilities of next generations to meet their own needs. Keywords: sustainability indicators, barometer of sustainable development, ecological footprint INTRODUCTION Setting objectives and monitoring the progress in attaining them with the aid of specific indicators are two typical characteristics of the strategic managerial approach. The close relation between the established objectives and the monitoring indicators allows a new approach, the strategic management, in the sustainable development, more suitable than the rigid planning approach, which has proved ineffective. The development indicators allow a long-term monitoring of the progress on the line of attaining objectives, being an indispensable tool for those who set the strategy and policies of development, allowing in the same time the information of the wide public on the achievements, failures or compromises which occurred in the dynamics of the sustainable development process [1]. Sustainable development indicators have proliferated, after the Earth Summit of 1992 held in Rio de Janeiro [2]. Thus, the strategy for sustainable development adopted by the European Council at Gothenburg in June 2001 explicitly states the will to regularly monitor the indicators of sustainable development in view of attaining the fundamental objective, which is "meeting the needs of the present generations without diminishing the opportunities of the future generations to meet their own needs"[3]. Therefore periodic reports were drawn up which enabled the permanent review of the European strategy of sustainable development. As in everyday life, when we use all kinds of indicators to signal us a change that appeared in a state of balance, of normality (fever, as an indicator of the health condition, or a red light as an indicator of the lack of fuel in a car, for instance), in science all kinds of indicators are being used on a wide scale in order to provide information about phenomena and domains of interest. Information is essential in the daily life, in science and politics, allowing for precise assessments of a specific situation, in a real time, which leads afterwards to making decisions. In particular, the indicators of sustainable development provide information: on the condition of the environment, economy and society they describe a certain situation; on weak points and potential problems thus drawing attention on the issues that need to be solved; on the effectiveness of actions and policies being thus indicators of the level of performance which show the degree of success if adopting certain measures and policies; 211
are useful in the drawing up of development policies thus being planning tools, assisting in the selection of specific measures from the multitude of alternative policies. More over, the indicators: help clarifying the objectives and priorities being explanatory tools, they contribute at transposing the concepts of sustainable development in practical terms; help sensitize the wide public on the problematic of sustainable development and actions needed for ensuring this development; help identify the discontinuities occurred in the data gathering and allow to establish a unitary conceptual framework for the data collections; ideally, they constitute the bound between the various components of the sustainable development, reflecting the importance of the dynamics of this complex system viewed in relation with its components MATERIAL AND METHOD In 1996 UNCSD proposed a set of 134 indicators of sustainable development, in direct relation with the thematic chapters of Agenda 21. In connection with this set of indicators UNCDS launched an international program of testing, meant to make the set of indicators of sustainable development better understood and better used by the national governments. It was intended to also obtain a feedback that would allow the improvement and development of the set of indicators. A number of 22 countries were selected to participate in the tests, countries situated in all the regions of the globe, plus 7 countries members of the European Community (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany and Great Britain). Further more, the program added to it several countries which had not been selected, along with Eurostat. The testing phase determined a review of the UNCSD set of indicators and the drawing up of a reduced set of indicators, yet more relevant for the policies of sustainable development (UNCSD 2001, Eurostat 2007), focused on the themes and subthemes of the sustainable development. The conceptual framework is constituted of a hierarchy of 10 themes and it has been developed taking into account the development policies. Thus, seven of them correspond to the priority areas of 2001 and 2002, while two themes can be found in the WSSD implementation plan. The first theme outlines the economic dimension of the sustainable development, being a connection bridge with the Lisbon process. Five of the themes correspond with the international commitments assumed by the Millennium Declaration, while a partial overlapping of these exists. We list the 10 themes, which are subsequently nuanced in sub-themes and addressing areas : 1. Economic development; 2. Poverty and social exclusion; 3. Aging society; 4. Public health; 5. Climate change and energy; 6. Consumption and production patterns; 7. Natural resource management; 8. Transportation; 9. Proper government; 10. Global partnership. 212
The sub-themes allow, as a rule, to monitor the process in attaining its objectives, while the addressing areas facilitate the detailed and diversified analysis of the factors within each theme. In some cases the sub-theme are representative for the so-called slow burning problematic, that is, that problematic which needs a larger period of time to be solved or to be modified in its evolution. The development framework of indicators is also determined by the development policies with which, inevitably, they are overlapped [4]. Some of the motrical forces, like energy, affect the development of several themes, but cannot be represented more than once in the same set of indicators of sustainable development. Even more, the purpose of these themes considerably differs: some of them address a very specific domain (climatic change and energy, for instance), while others (the consumption and production patterns) cover a great variety of general aspects, as well as environment and socio-economic aspects. All these aspects determine a strict prioritization of indicators within each theme, ensuring, in the same time, by means of standardized concepts, the definition, classification and structuring of information in such a manner which would facilitate the use of indicators for the actual monitoring of progress within all the thematic areas. The Commission of the European Commission has used this new approach at developing a set of indicators of sustainable development, firmly anchored in the policies of development of the European Union [5]. The set is comprised of 155 indicators in a hierarchic form on 3 levels represented as a pyramid with 98 indicators at the basis. Theses have allowed the drawing up of the first report of monitoring of the European sustainable development, published in 2005. Having been mandated by the new European Commission for sustainable development strategies, Eurostat revised the set of indicators drawn up in 2005 during the period 2006-2007, in accordance with three major objectives of the European Commission: - adjusting the set adopted in 2005 in order to better reflect the new European policies of sustainable development; - fluidization of the set of indicators in order to improve communication, maintaining in the same time its stability on the time axis; - general improvement of the set of indicators, taking into account the recent development statistics. In order to comprehend the multi-dimensional nature of sustainable development, one needs a set formed of a great number of indicators. In order to facilitate the exchange of information, the set of indicators is built under the shape of a hierarchic pyramid on three levels. The various levels are used for meeting the needs of various types of users. The indicator structure produced by Eurostat for the first monitoring report of the renewed EU strategy assigns to each strategic dimension a representative indicator (Level 1), a set of indicators for the subordinated operational objectives (Level 2) and descriptive indicators of the domains of intervention for the associated policies (Level 3). A supplementary set of indicators outside this structure (contextual indicators) is included for the phenomena difficult to interpret normatively or whose response to interventions remains unidentified. The conceptual framework on three levels corresponds to the objectives of development and to the measures of implementation that need to be monitored by means of development indicators. Level 1 is composed of a set of 12 indicators of high level, allowing an initial analysis of the theme development. These indicators are used by the factors of political decision, serving in the same time for public information. Level 2 corresponds to the sub-themes of the conceptual framework and, together with level 1 indicators, it monitors the progress in the attainment of the objectives of the general 213
policies. It comprises 45 indicators meant for the evaluation of the core of political areas and communication with the public. Level 3 corresponds to the domains to be addressed, being formed of varied measures which implement the major objectives and facilitate a deeper understanding of specific issues of certain themes. These 98 indicators are designed for a more detailed political analysis and for a better understanding of the trends and of the complexity of aspects associated to the theme or for the interconnection with other themes. They are designed to be used by specialists, without being accessible to the wide public. Identifying the most adequate indicators is an iterative process. Since the commission is compelled to periodically revise its development policy, this reviewing may have as a result the alteration of the set of indicators, so as to adjust itself to the ever changing needs. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Experimental tools for measuring sustainable development 1. Barometer of sustainable development The Sustainable Development Barometer is a tool which provides an aggregate indicator of the sustainable development. It was developed by Robert Prescott-Allen [6]. It offers visualization depending on two axes: one is the welfare of the ecosystem, while the other is the well being of human society. The assessment of the level of sustainable development is being made in relation with the most unfavourable axis. This method is used for risk evaluation of the compromise between the state of well being of human system and of the environment system. This can also be noticed in the originating point of the axes, each of them having the same importance. Each definite indicator is measured by a scale of performance. In this way various indicators can be compared or aggregated. The barometer scale is divided in five sectors. Fig.1. Sustainability barometer, source: http://www.eoearth.org Although it gave rise to arguments concerning the degree of subjectivity it implies, the Barometer of sustainable development stimulates the clear, unequivocal definition, at user s level, of the notion of sustainable development. It is useful for determining the dimensions or processes that have to be measured, for the selection of the indicators it would represent, thus contributing to the drawing up of clear targets for the policies of sustainable development. The approach proposed by the barometer of sustainable development is easy to understand and calculate and it provides a quick understanding of the state of well being of 214
the human and environment systems. Also, it provides the interested ones the possibility to define their own criteria regarding sustainable development, turning the process into a participative one. On of the most important aspects, which should be obvious in all the sets of indicators, is the fact that there are no substitutions concerning the well being between the two systems, both being equally necessary in the sustainable development. The limitations of this methodology are given especially by the degree of subjectivity they imply. 2. Ecological footprint The Ecological footprint is a management tool of the resources which calculates what surface of land and how much water a certain human population needs in order to produce the resources it consumes and to absorb the waste and industrial residues. In order to survive we consume what nature offers us. Every one of our actions has an impact on the planet s ecosystem. This should not make us worry as long as the human consumption does not exceed the force of regeneration of Earth [7]. Nowadays the ecological footprint is with 23% greater than what our planet can regenerate. In other words, we need more than a year and two months to produce what we consume in one year. If we maintain this rhythm we will exhaust the ecological resources of the planet, a threat which is still greatly underestimated, and as a consequence, it is not approached adequately. By measuring the ecological footprint of a population (of an individual, of a town, of a nation or of the whole mankind) we become aware of the consumption surplus, awareness that could lead to an optimal management of the ecological resources. The ecological footprint enables us to make personal or collective decisions in supporting the optimization of consumption in order to maintain the planet we all inhabit within the functional parameters [8]. The ecological footprint is rather an accountability tool which measures the quantity of nature which a population or a country consumes. Values are equivalent to units of surface. Measurements are based on the premise that any human activity uses resources and needs a cycle of cleaning the residues which can be considered as equivalent to the biologically productive surface necessary for fulfilling these functions. a) b) Fig.2. Romania: a) Ecological footprint vs. biodiversity; b) by components Source: Global Footprint Network Using Romania's ecological footprint, one can observe, at a first sight, both the disaster triggered off by the policy of intensive industrialization of the 70 s, as well as the return to a balance between ecological footprint and bio-capacity, as a result of the events of 1989 and of the political and social changes they have brought about. And still, at a first sight 215
one can notice the tendency, disquieting by its constancy, of the decrease of bio-capacity at the level of the whole country. Fig. 3. World consumption cartogram (2003) CONCLUSIONS The ecological footprint is an indirect means of measuring sustainable development. It actually measures the consumption of goods and transposes it in units of productive surface. Taking into account that the consumption pattern is a major trait of sustainable development, it succeeds in taking this basic element and in transposing it into another basic element, that is, in the resource consumption. A disadvantage of this method is that fact that the socio-economic aspects are only indirectly reflected in the results. Even more, the ecological footprint does not take in important aspects related to environment, like for instance its contamination. All these aspects lead to the conclusion that the ecological footprint is an appropriate tool for the aggregation of the raw results of environment monitoring, at a global or local level. As far as the sustainable development policies are concerned, be they national or local, the ecological footprint is useful, but it has to be supplemented with detailed information. It nevertheless remains a very useful tool, especially when there is available data for a period of time, allowing for the monitoring and facilitating the comparisons at a global level, or comparisons between states related to the consumption patterns and it can be used to determine the evolution tendencies in time. Its contribution to the concept of sustainable development consists in outlining the aspects of equity-inequity between nations, among developed societies and developing societies. The indicators differ from primary data and statistics, having a meaning that transcends the value of the attributes directly associated to them, thus being real connection bridges between detailed data and the interpreted information; they have a meaning beyond the value of the associated parameter. Indicators have a meaning which allows the 216
concentrated representation of information, which would otherwise need a greater volume of data in order to be represented and conveyed. As a consequence, evaluating and communicating important parameters becomes easier and faster. Yet this capacity of communication, of conveying meanings beyond the value of parameters, strongly depends on the quality of the indicators selection. Another advantage resulting from the use of indicators of sustainable development, not to be neglected in the current context of globalization, is the possibility to compare and reproduce some results. If the set of indicators is based on a coherent methodology, then it can be used to make comparisons in time and space, in order to find correlations and to monitor the changes and the tendencies. There are, nonetheless other problems that may occur when a certain set of indicators is being selected and used. One of the major problems is related to subjectivity. Subjectivity can appear in two different moments: at the selection of representative indicators, and at the evaluation of the results of indicators. Any individual who has to select a set of indicators is, inevitably, an individual with limited knowledge what Meadows called the dependence on a fake model [9] with a certain social and scientific past, and so, with an inherent doze of subjectivism. Other problems that can be mentioned are related to the lack of significant data, which can lead to the lack of vital information, which can further lead to the measuring of what can be measured instead of what is important, or to the over-aggregation of too many data, which further leads to unclear and meaningless results, which in fact greatly reduces the possibilities of analysis. If indicators are not selected systematically and carefully, they will convey an erroneous message which will only lead to erroneous conclusions. REFERENCES 1. Steuerer, R., and A. Martinuzzi (2005). Towards a new pattern of strategy formation in the public sector: first experiences with national strategies for sustainable development in Europe, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, nr.23, pp.455-472. 2. xxx Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992 (United Nations publication), vol. I-III. 3. xxx United Nations "Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development." General Assembly Resolution 42/187, 11 December 1987. 4. xxx OECD Core Set of Indicators for Environmental Performance Reviews, Paris, OECD, 1993 5. xxx OECD Towards Sustainable Development: Environmental Indicators, Paris, OECD, 1998. 6. Prescott-Allen, R. (1997). Barometer of Sustainability: The Well-being of Nations, Switzerland, IUCN. 7. Wackernagel, M. and W. Rees (1996).Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth, Gabriola Island, BC, New Society Publishers. 8. Wackernagel, M. et al (1997). Ecological Footprints of Nations. How much nature do they use How much nature do they have? Rio +5 Study, Universidad Anahuac de Xalapa, Mexico, 9. Meadows, D. (1998).Indicators and Information Systems for Sustainable Development, Report to the Balaton Group, The Sustainability Institute. 217