on environmental welfare policy and its measurements unosd consultative w/s 2013. 12. 10 hoi-seong...

On Environmental Welfare Policy and Its Measurements

On Environmental Welfare Policy and Its Measurements

UNOSD Consultative W/S2013. 12. 10

Hoi-Seong Jeong

Institute for the Environment & Civilization

I. Why Environmental Welfare Indicators?

II. Logical Background of Environmental Welfare Policy

ContentsContents

Ⅳ. Concluding Remarks: Directions for Developing New EW Indicator systems

III. Review on Environmental Indicators from the Perspective of EW Policy

I. Why Environmental Welfare and Its Indicators ?

I. Why Environmental Welfare and Its Indicators ?


Modern Society and Welfare State: Arguments and Limitations

• Unfair society and arguments on welfare state Aggravation of relative poverty

• Arguments are aimed for coexistence(living together) but limited to the issues of the present generation.

Environment as a Prerequisite for National Welfare

• Environmental quality as a basic needs to sustain human dignity

• Securing a high quality environment is a sufficient & necessary condition for sus-tainable growth of happiness.

• After the basic human needs for survival are fulfilled quantitatively, attention is natu-rally drawn to qualitative values of economic growth.

• A welfare nation, in the true sense, is one where even the qualitative value of eco-nomic growth is equally distributed and most of its members feel happiness.

Human Happiness, More than Just Material Satisfaction

Environmental Welfare and EW Indicator system


• All these challenges and the emerging SDGs require a new concept of environ-mental welfare policy and it’s measurement, an EW indicator system.

• Keeping track of change and trends in EW using a well designed EW indicators systems to condition outcomes and evaluate the effectiveness of EW Policy

Harmony Between the Present and Future Generations

• Excessive consumption in the present generation can undermine the foundation of welfare of the future generations.

• Welfare policy should serve for the foundation of prosperity and happiness to be shared by the future generations as well.

II. Logical Background of Envi-ronmental Welfare Policy

II. Logical Background of Envi-ronmental Welfare Policy

1. Environment and Human Happiness

Dual Characteristics of Environmental Resources

• As a basic need:

- Environmental assets (air, water, soil, etc.) are at the bottom of human needs for existence: Prerequisites for universal welfare

• As a Luxury Goods:

- As income levels rise the demand for high quality environmental assets also rises.

80% of major diseases are related with the exposure to environmental risk factors (85/102diseases).

An estimation of 24% of the disease-related health loss and 23% of the mortality rate is at-tributable to environmental causes.

Increase of income


• The Easterlin’s Paradox- The rise in income level doesn’t necessarily increase the national happiness.

The Theory of Rel-ativity

(Comparison with others)

The Theory of De-sire-distention

(Desire-whetting Soci-ety)

The Theory of Tread-mill

(Happiness ends with adaptation.)

The Paradox of Happiness

Human Happiness and Environment

• Law of diminishing marginal utility - Ordinary goods: diminishing marginal utility (buyable happiness) - Environmental goods: accumulating marginal utility (non-buyable happiness)

• Income elasticity of demand - Environment: high income elasticity of demand. The paradox of happiness doesn’t apply. - Ordinary goods: low income elasticity of demand

• Exclusiveness of consumption- Enjoying environmental quality doesn’t require exclusiveness and comparison with

others.

• Diversity and boredom - Environment, highly diverse, precludes boredom and serves as a source of lasting happiness.


2. Background of Environmental Welfare Policy

Welfare State and Environmental Problem

- First, damage caused by chemicals uses (such as asbestos)

- Second, regressive nature of environmental damages

- Third, regressive tendency of climate change impacts

- Fourth, inequality in accessibility to natural environment

Damage from the use of chemicals

Regressive quality of environmental damage

Regressive quality of climate change

Inequality in accessibility to nature

The Deepening Problem of Environmental Injustice

• Inequality in the distribution of environmental services• Inequality in the sharing of environmental damages

Increases in Environmental Threat to the Social Weak

• 350,000 yearly deaths due to climate change and 20,000,000 climate-related refugees in 2008

• Increase in medical expense & decrease in food production and hike in food price• Danger of nuclear accidents (ex. the Fukushima nuclear disaster)

2. Background of Environmental Welfare Policy

Environmental Injustice among Nations

• Ratio of Environmental diseases: OECD 14% vs. Non-OECD 24%• Duration of diseases: Non-OECD member countries suffers more than 15 times than

OECD member countries

3. Defining Environmental Welfare Policy

Concept and Purposes of Environmental Welfare Policy

- The Purposes of Environmental Welfare Policy

• Related Concepts: environmental welfare, ecological welfare, environmental equal-ity, environmental justice, ecological justice

• To let the entire nation enjoy decent life having their environmental rights satisfied.

The target class of social welfare policy is more vulnerable to environmental damage. Environmental welfare policy pursues symbiosis within a human society and symbiosis between humans and nature.

- The Concept of Environmental Welfare Policy

• To let the entire nation enjoy environmental quality as a basic need for quality life.

• Intends to guarantee all the people in nation - both present generation and future generation – minimum levels environmental quality and services as basic needs that are required to enjoy decent quality of life

13

<Table> Comparison of Environmental and Social Welfare

Category Environmental Welfare Social Welfare

Commodities Public provision Private provision

Timeframe Long-term approach Short-term approach

Policy TargetCurrent generation and future genera-tions

Current generation

GoalEmphasis on advanced prevention Outcome equity improve-

ment

Means of Ap-proach

Spatial approach comprehensive im-provement of quality of life

Household/individual focus point, class section, group

Participation in Policy Process

Emphasis on participation in decision making process effecting the environment Provider → beneficiary

Service Locally based service Standardized

Service Provision Standard

Income, biological weakness, region based, physical requisites Income

Source: Koh, Jae Kyung(2013)


• What matters most for mechanized men in the modern industrial world → Nature as it is, which has no affectation → Nature provides a foundation for safe living and gives stability and richness to our

mind

• A sustainable welfare state in a true sense is a society where people can find peace and happiness in nature, where life evolves through continuous cooperation and adaptation.

• The concept of environmental welfare aims for such kind of welfare state.

Environmental Welfare towards a Sustainable Welfare State

• Extensive transition from ex-post welfare to preventive welfare

• Supplementing material welfare with emotional/mental welfare

• Transition from present-bound welfare to one embracing future generations

• From consumption-centered welfare to productive welfare (for preserving pro-duction elements)

• From spatially isolated welfare to spatially integrated welfare By closing the regional and residential gaps in environmental quality

Meaning of Emerging of the Idea of Environmental Welfare


4. Principles of Environmental Welfare Policy

Securing Environmental Basic Rights

• Securing the basic rights of people to enjoy the environment as a basic need (for the socially and economically disadvantaged)

• Considering the aspect of ecological justice as well

Proactive and Prevention-oriented Welfare

• Preventive measures are more effective and economical than reactive ones to im-prove human welfare.

• Environmental welfare policy that intends to provide a healthy and sound environ-ment could prevent outbreak of disease and supply comfortable environment.

• Environmental welfare intends to cure inequality in the spatial distribution of environmental resources and services.

• Policies should be established and implemented through democratic procedures so that opinions of beneficiaries can be well reflected.

Democratic Community-based Approach

Considering Next Generation’s Welfare

• The future generation have a right to enjoy as much welfare as the present genera-tion

• Efforts should be made to protect this right from being infringed upon (environmental quality, foundation for natural resource use, biodiversity, etc)

Providing a Productive Welfare

• By providing the good environmental conditions for the socio-economically weak to maintain good health, environmental welfare can promote the productive activ-ities of them

• Many policies to protect the environment can create good jobs for the unedu-cated and poor social groups that are subject to social welfare.

4. Principles of Environmental Welfare Policy

18

Why Environmental Indicators

• To enhance the environmental sustainability of nations an index which can assess their current circumstances and evaluate the state of SD and issues being faced is needed

• Major Functions of Environmental Indicators - Keeping track of changes and trends in environmental conditions - Suggesting the direction for environmental policy - Assessing policy effectiveness - Provision of environmental information

Trends in the SD indicator Development

• Currently most international organizations and many countries includ-ing Korea have put environmental indicators systems and SD indica-tors in place and are using them to assess the environmental condi-tions and environmental policy performance

• This presentation briefly reviews the environmental indicators, the UNCSD, OECD and EU etc. are all developing indexes and carrying out assessments of countries on sustainable environmental management

1. Environmental Indicators and Trends

19

1) World Environment Indicators (World Bank)

Based on urban sustainability indicators, the system was de-veloped to assess the environmental pollution occurring as a result of rapid development in the US in the 1970s with indi-cators divided into 4 sections outlined below:

– Main Indicators – on natural resources including: agriculture, land, for-est, coast, water, mineral, fossil fuel etc.

– Pollution Indicators – on climate change, greenhouse gas, acidification etc.

– Bio-resources Indicators – on biodiversity, coast and land features– Human Indicators – related to human life such as: health, water qual-

ity, air quality, food safety, housing, waste and access to employment etc.

The indicators are based on the ideal of an absence of threats to ecological balance and all people being able to share in the benefits of a healthy environment

2. Review on Various Environmental Indicators Systems

20

2) OECD Environmental Indicators Realizing the importance of environmental conditions the OECD

began developing various core environmental indicators in the early 1990s.

While advising member countries to develop environmental indicators re-flecting their circumstances, the OECD is are actively using the results to assess their environmental performance.

The indicators measure the influence of human activity on the en-vironment, current environmental circumstances and the effec-tiveness of efforts to address these areas

- Environmental Issues: climate change, ozone layer depletion, eutrophica-tion, acidification, toxic materials, quality of urban environment, waste production, land degeneration (desertification, erosion)

- Natural Resources: water resources, biodiversity/scenery, forest re-sources, fish stocks

- Basic Indicators: population growth and density, GDP, industrial produc-tion, energy provision and provision structure, traffic volume, agricultural productivity etc.


21

3) UNCSD Sustainable Development Indica-tors

The program to develop sustainable development indicators was launched in 1995

- In 1996 the first draft of the UNCSD sustainable development indica-tors (SDI) system of 134 indicators covering the main aspects of Agenda 21 (society/economy/ environment/institutions) was an-nounced

- In 2001 through experimental research on the previous SDI a new core SDI covering 4 sectors (society/environment/economy/institutions) 15 areas, 38 articles and 57 indicators was selected

The system makes a general assessment of the current state of sustainable development through

- Ensuring the provision of statistical data over time for each indicator item, - Analyzing the trends of change in indicators and - Working to grasp what effect the outcomes have on the sustainability

of development


22

A. EU – Sustainable Development Indicators In 1997 the EU developed SDIs based on the 132 indicators of the

UNCSD system, and later edited them in 2001 Divided into 4 sections (society, environment, economy, institutions) and

made up of 15 areas, 38 items and 64 indicators

B. UK – Sustainable Development Indicators Put together in 1996, and made up of 21 sections, 51 areas and 118

indicators. Edited in 2005 to be 6 sections with 147 indicators. The 6 sections are: sustainability indicators, sustainable economy, sustainable

community, environment and resource management, international coopera-tion and development and ‘other’

C. Germany – Sustainable Development Indicators Created in 2008 based on an image of a future society which has

achieved sustainable development,

The indicators were organized into 4 categories: fairness between genera-tions, quality of life, social solidarity and international responsibility

Analyzed as handling important social conditions which all of international so-ciety should be aiming towards


4) National Sustainable Development Indica-tors

23

D. USA – Sustainable Development Indicators Set up in 1998 based on 20 issues chosen for national sustain-

able development

The 20 issues chosen were divided into 3 groups of indicators: eco-nomic, environment, and social indicators; matching the national sus-tainable development strategy areas

E. Korea – Sustainable Development Indicators With the establishment of the SD implementation plan in Octo-

ber 2006 at a cabinet meeting, national sustainability indicators

77 in total suitable for measuring conditions in Korea) were chosen in

order to objectively diagnose the national level of sustainability

The indicators were structured to be similar to international systems

with four levels: 3 sections, 14 areas, 33 items and 77 indicators

The information provided by the sustainable development indi-

cators, which probe the status of national SD, is being used as

foundational data for the supplementation of national SD strat-

egy


24

A. Environmental Performance Index (EPI) Purpose: environmental performance assessment of reduction of

pressure of human demands of the environment, ecosystem durability and the sound management of natural resources cov-ering all nations of the world

Announced: officially presented once every two years at the Davos Fo-rum held in Switzerland

Outcomes: serving to keep countries around the world alert to the im-portance of environmental improvement

B. Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI) Purpose: Provide pre-outlooks on individual countries’ long-term

sustainability through assessment of environmental quality and also social and economic conditions etc.

The 2005 ESI was composed of 5 main areas with 20 indicators


5) EPI and ESI

25

Category WB Indicators OECD Environmental Indicators UNCSD IndicatorsOECD Better Life

Index

Economy

Agriculture & Rural Development

Socio-economic

Population growth & density Poverty HousingAid Effectiveness

Climate Change

Growth and structure of GDP

Economic Development

IncomeEconomic Policy & External Debt

Global economic part-nership

Financial Sector

Poverty

Urban Development Private & government final consumption expenditure

Consumption and pro-duction patterns

JobsScience & Technology

Society

GenderIndustrial production Governance　 Community

Health

Infrastructure

Structure of energy supply HealthEducation

Labor & Social Protection Civic Engage-ment

GenderRoad traffic volumes Education Health

Private Sector

Public SectorStock of road vehicles

DemographicsLife Satisfaction

Education

Agricultural production SafetySocial Development

3. Comparison of Major Environmental Indicators System

26

Category WB Indicators OECD Environmental Indicators UNCSD IndicatorsOECD Better Life

Index

Environ-ment

Environment

Environmen-tal Issue

Climate Change Natural hazards Water quality

Energy & Mining Ozone layer depletion Atmosphere Air Pollution

Eutrophication Land

AcidificationOceans, seas and coasts

Toxic contamination Freshwater

Urban environmental quality

Waste

Soil degradation

Nature Re-source

Water resources

Forest resources

Fish resources

Biodiversity

3. Comparison of Major Environmental Indicators System

4. Implications for the Environmental Welfare Policy Analysis

Diverse but unclear environmental indicator systems

• Very diverse environmental indicator systems have been designed until now - Most of them address various categories of environmental issues and - also focus environmental conditions and policy efforts either separately or together

Insufficient for the Measurement of Environmental Welfare

• Most EI systems use too many indicators without clear purposes and targets

• Recently equality and poverty and climate change issues seem to be draw-ing more attention.

• It could be argued that those systems have a certain limitations in diag-nosing nation’s environmental welfare conditions and policy efforts.

• Accordingly one must redesign an environmental indicator system to review EWP efforts of a nation.

Ⅳ. Concluding Remarks:Directions for Developing New EW Indicator System

Ⅳ. Concluding Remarks:Directions for Developing New EW Indicator System

- The improvement of quality of life - in particular for the social weak who are vulner-able for environmental deterioration - rather than mere environmental conservation

- An integrated welfare policy considering the disparity of social class and regions together and the use of environmental policy as a mean of social welfare improve-ment

- The welfare of the future generation emphasizing precautionary measures and the conservation of the environmental as productive resources

Major Features of Environmental Welfare Indicators Could Illustrate

- Giving more priority to a proactive and prevention measure than mere cure after things happened

- Maintaining a good balance between the present and the future generations’ wel-fare conserving the environment and resources for future use

- Considering the improvement of productive capacity of the social weak rather than the mere improvement of consumption level of them

- Giving priority in the provision of the community-based welfare goods and services rather than individual-oriented ones to improve the society’s overall welfare level

Emphasis Shift in the Environmental Welfare Indicators System

1. An Approach to the Environmental Welfare Indicators

2. Major Categories and Indicators of Environmental Welfare

Categories Policy Items and Possible Indicators

Securing Environmen-tal Rights

- Basic Environmental Goods (air quality, tap water, energy supply, etc.)

- Basic Environmental Services (sewerage service, waste col-lection service)

- Access to Environmental Amenity (neighborhood parks, natu-ral parks)

Preventive/Proactive Measures

- Nature Accessibility of the Social Weak to improve Productiv-ity

- Environmental Health Management (environmental disease prevention, protection of children’ health)

- Environmental Safety Management (environmentally vulnera-ble and dangerous regions)

Productive Welfare Means

- Environment-related Jobs Creation for the Poor - Promotion of Eco-industry (i.e., eco-tourisms) as Local Com-

munity Businesses- Environmental Safety and Soundness of Workplaces

Next Generation Con-sideration

- Climate Change Vulnerability(mitigation and adaptation)- Biodiversity Conservation(protective regions, endangered

species habitats)- Energy/Resource Depletion(energy and resource use effi-

ciency, renewable resources base conservation, green energy development)

Participation/Commu-nity Development

- Citizens’ Participation & Information Disclosure- Environmental Education- Community Activities – Public and Private Partnership

Thank you for listening Thank you for listening

Hoi-seong Jeong, Ph.D

President, Institute for the Environment & Civilization

[email protected]

Hoi-seong Jeong, Ph.D

President, Institute for the Environment & Civilization

[email protected]