Talk:Sustainability/Measuring sustainability

Archives

Archive 1: Initial discussion/drafts
Archive 2: Final drafts

Comments

I thought we should look at a clean copy after all those changes. I still have some references to add now that we have a stable version. I've left the previous version up in case Nick wants to see the most recent changes. However, I will have to archive that to finalize the references (two "Notes" sections seems to scramble the refs). Sunray (talk) 22:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I tweaked out repetition of LCA and EF. Granitethighs (talk) 00:03, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Changes look good, clean copy looks good! We should keep info regarding TNS brief and direct readers to the main article. Nick carson (talk) 07:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Time to go live? Is it possible to make the scattergram larger or does that create problems? Granitethighs (talk) 08:10, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I believe it is. As to the size of the scattergram, I think I might be able to move the text down and have it span the width of the page. Sunray (talk) 08:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Measuring Sustainability

Main article: Sustainability measurement

Sustainability measurement Key concepts & tools
Carbon accounting Ecological footprint Ecological economics Environmental impact assessment Environmental indicator Environmental Performance Index Environmental Sustainability Index Happy Planet Index Input output analysis Life cycle assessment Natural resource economics Natural step Social accounting State of the Environment Sustainability reporting Thermoeconomics Triple bottom line accounting

By establishing quantitative measures for sustainability it is possible to set goals and measure progress. To survive on planet Earth humans must live within its measurable biophysical constraints. The Natural Step (TNS) framework developed by Karl-Henrik Robert examines sustainability and resource use from its thermodynamic foundations to determine how humans use and apportion natural capital in a way that is sustainable and just. The TNS framework's system conditions of sustainability suggest a means for the scientifically-based measurement of sustainability.

Natural capital includes resources from the earth's crust (i.e., minerals, oil), those produced by humans (synthetic substances), and those of the biosphere. Equitable access to natural capital is also a component of sustainability. The energy generated in use of resources - referred to as exergy - is the embodied energy, of a product or service over its life cycle. It's analysis, as in methods such as Life Cycle Analysis or Ecological Footprint are basic indicators of sustainability on various scales.

There is now a vast number of sustainability indicators, metrics, benchmarks, indexes as well as reporting procedures, audits and more. They include environmental, social and economic measures separately or together over many scales and contexts from the biosphere as a whole to households, national economies, wetlands and cities. Environmental factors are integrated with economics through ecological economics, resource economics and thermoeconomics, and social factors through metrics like the Happy Planet Index which measures the well-being of people in the nations of the world while taking into account their environmental impact. Some of the best known and most widely used sustainability measures are listed in the side bar, they include corporate sustainability reporting, Triple Bottom Line accounting accounting, and estimates of the quality of sustainability governance for individual countries using the Environmental Sustainability Index and Environmental Performance Index.

Global human sustainability

On a global scale we need to know the human impact on the overall carrying capacity of the planet – are humans living sustainably on planet Earth? The Ecological footprint measures human consumption in terms of the biologically productive land needed to provide the resources, and absorb the wastes of the average global citizen. In 2008 it required 2.7 global hectares per person, 30% more than the natural biological capacity of 2.1 global hectares (assuming no provision for that needed for other organisms). The resulting ecological deficit must be met from unsustainable sources - use of stored resources including fossil fuels, and "mining" natural resources including forests and fisheries at greater than their rate of regeneration. The figure below indicates the sustainability of a range of countries in terms of the Ecological footprint compared to the UN Human Development Index (a measure of standard of living).

Per capita demands on the environment, as measured by the Ecological Footprint generally increase with increasing affluence, but many countries achieve high levels of human development with relatively low resource use.

The chart is a graphic presentation showing what is necessary for countries to maintain an acceptable standard of living while also living at a globally sustainable level. At present Cuba is the best example in this category. The general trend is for higher standards of living to become less sustainable. As always population growth has a marked influence on levels of consumption and the efficiency of resource use.

A wealth of information generated by reports at the national, regional and city scales confirm the global trend to societies that are becoming less sustainable over time.

Biodiversity & sustainability Key concepts & information
Applied ecology Biodiversity Conservation biology Ecosystem services Endangered species Environmental science Extinction Genetic erosion Habitat fragmentation Invasive species Systems ecology Wildlife conservation World Conservation Monitoring Centre

Direct human impact on the biosphere

Land for humans - Chicago

Main article: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment provides the most comprehensive current synthesis of the state of the Earth’s ecosystems. Human activity is having an escalating and potentially critical impact on the biodiversity of ecosystems, reducing both their resilience and capacity. The report refers to natural systems as humanity's life-support system, providing the necessary services for humans to flourish. It includes measures of 24 ecosystem services concluding that only four have shown improvement over the last 50 years, 15 are in serious decline, and five are in a precarious condition.

Comments

Two final things:

1. How about the current configuration for the scattergram, GT?
2. Nick, I wasn't sure what you meant by your comment "We should keep info regarding TNS brief and direct readers to the main article." Did you want to shorten what we now have or were you o.k. with it? Sunray (talk) 08:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Size of scattergram good but on my screen there are big areas of white space - is that what you mean? If the scattergram goes to the left does that make the text and side bars fit better? Also we could fit Chicago in somewhere else if its a real problem space-wise. I'm not used to fitting things in - presumably they can squeeze into prior and following text without causing problems? Granitethighs (talk) 09:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty much a neophyte at wiki markup, so we may want to ask for assistance. Not sure what you mean by "big areas of white space." Where do you see these? The problem I've had is that when I enlarge my window, I get small remnants of text bleeding up the left side of the diagram. I've tried making the resolution a bit higher but don't know how that affects your problem of white space. You ask about scattergram left. That is the way it was. The problem with that was that the diagram had to become smaller to accommodate the column of text. How big a problem is the readability of the text? As it is a thumb, we could always put a note saying "click on diagram to enlarge image." Sunray (talk) 18:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not overly worried about space. I remember an old editor colleague of mine saying: "You have to relieve a wilderness of text." He was referring to white space on the page, but also graphics. I like the Chicago pic. Sunray (talk) 18:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Fine - each person's screen displays differently it seems. I like your idea of getting someone at the end to tweak all the pics etc. We can make the side bars smaller etc. In the meantime we might as well upload and move on? Granitethighs (talk) 19:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Right then. I've uploaded this version to the main article. We need to check for duplication in the main article, and, on the other hand we have to ensure that things didn't get eliminated that are needed in the article. GT, would you be able to cast your eye on the article to look for duplication. Sunray (talk) 09:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)