Joachim H. Spangenberg

Environmental space and the prism of sustainability: frameworks for indicators measuring sustainable development

Abstract The notion of Environmental Space refers to external criteria regarding resources available for human consumption. On the one hand, it has been demonstrated that the reduction of energy consumption, material flows and land use would significantly contribute to reducing the main stresses for the European environment. On the other hand, the concept defines a socially motivated minimum of resource availability, permitting to lead a dignified life in the respective society. Environmental space is a tool for exploring sustainable development benchmarks on a sound scientific basis, and it is helpful to derive indicators of sustainable development for different applications on the macro as well as on the micro level. However, the environmental space concept expresses no preference regarding the structure of the economic system, as long as the environmental and social benchmarks are respected, nor does it suggest specific economic sustainability indicators. Since in 1995, the CSD formally introduced the institutional dimension as the fourth dimension of sustainable development, sustainable development can be described by referring to four dimensions and their six interlinkages. Using the Prism of Sustainability , the concept—although rather complex—can easily be communicated and used as a tool for gathering public support for sustainability policies. The prism simplifies matters by structuring them, but avoids the oversimplification inherent to aggregate indices. At the macro level, the environmental space and the prism of sustainability have been applied to international, regional and national indicator development. At the micro level, systems of indicators for households, companies and local communities have been developed. The indicators have also been used in dynamic modeling, demonstrating their capability to assess the sustainability of different policy strategies.

Towards indicators for institutional sustainability: lessons from an analysis of Agenda 21

Abstract In the course of evaluating the progress in implementing Agenda 21 [Results of the World Conference on Environment and Development: Agenda 21, UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, United Nations, New York] the “Commission on Sustainable Development” began developing a set of indicators of sustainable development. The first version was finalised in 1996 with the suggestion of 134 indicators [Indicators of Sustainable Development, Framework and Methodologies, United Nations, New York] and put to a field test, resulting in a final version published in 2001 [Indicators of Sustainable Development: Guidelines and Methodologies, United Nations, New York]. In both versions, the indicators are divided up into for issue areas: economic, environmental, social, and institutional. The further conceptual separation into driving force, state, and response indicators was given up in the final version. Generally, (inter-) governmental organisations are explicitly referred to as institutions, which in the course of decision making have to take aspects of sustainable development into consideration. The use of terms related to institutional contexts in Agenda 21 implies that the underlying understanding of institutions is broader, since it refers not only to organisations, but as well to institutional mechanisms like procedures and legal norms (formal or informal, explicit or implicit systems of rules). Applying the even more extended definition of social sciences, including institutional orientations, like societal norms and leitbilder reveals an additional wealth of institutional aspects in Agenda 21, which—as opposed to organisations and mechanisms—obviously has not been considered as institutions by the authors. We illustrate this with a complete “screening” of all chapters of Agenda 21 according to all three classes of institutions. This analysis uncovers various important institutional aspects of sustainable development that are not yet reflected in the current set of indicators. They are covered by a rather complete list of institutions in Agenda 21 [Deriving Institutional Sustainability Indicators, Final Report to the German Federal Environment Agency, Research Project No. 298 121 40, Wuppertal Institute, Cologne/Berlin, p. 188]; some examples from it are provided with this paper. Furthermore, we present a proposal for how to structure the results of the analysis. For organisations it is obvious that not their very existence (yes/no) can be the basis for indicator development, but their effectiveness has to be the point of reference. While the DSR scheme provides no suitable analytical basis for indicator development, it offers a convenient classification scheme for results derived otherwise. This applies not only to the CSD indicators, but also for the institutional mechanisms.

Environmentally sustainable household consumption: from aggregate environmental pressures to priority fields of action

Unsustainable consumption patterns of the North (or rather of the global affluent consumers class) have been identified by Agenda 21 as one of the key driving forces behind the unsustainable development. However, neither accounting based on the system of national accounts SNA nor household economics provide the proper instruments to assess the environmental impact of household decision making. Eco-efficiency assessments as familiar in the business sector provide no appropriate tool for households. As an alternative an environmental space based assessment scheme is suggested covering the major pressures on the environment caused by household decisions. The methodology is used twice: once to analyse the environmental relevance of the main activity clusters of household consumption and once to identify the dominant acts of consumption within each cluster. The latter provide the basis for deriving environmental performance indicators. A rough analysis of household influence potentials permits to identify housing, eating and mobility as the three priority fields for action for minimising the environmental impact of households. Extending the influence analysis actor matrixes are derived allocating influence and thus responsibility for environmental pressures to different groups of economic agents.

Ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation: concepts and a glossary.

The RUBICODE project draws on expertise from a range of disciplines to develop and integrate frameworks for assessing the impacts of environmental change on ecosystem service provision, and for rationalising biodiversity conservation in that light. With such diverse expertise and concepts involved, interested parties will not be familiar with all the key terminology. This paper defines the terms as used within the project and, where useful, discusses some reasoning behind the definitions. Terms are grouped by concept rather than being listed alphabetically.

Provision of ecosystem services is determined by human agency, not ecosystem functions. Four case studies

Ecosystem services (ESS) are frequently described as nature’s free gift to humankind. However, the first step of ESS and benefit generation is recognising the usability of structures, processes and outputs of ecosystems. This use-value attribution transforms the ecosystem functions (ESF) into ecosystem service potentials (ESP). By investing physical resources, energy and labour, and frequently money as a means to provide them, agents mobilise (part of) the potentials. Cultural, economic and legal constraints limit the mobilisation. The resulting ESS are appropriated to be directly consumed, exploited to provide other goods and services, or marketed, resulting in monetary income. Changing use-value attribution leads to change service potentials, to different mobilisation and appropriation patterns, and different benefits. Human agency, not ESF determine the services provided. This is illustrated by comparing traditional and current services generated from the same ecosystem in four countries undergoing socio-economic transitions: Kenya, Mongolia, the Philippines and Vietnam. All four cases show that changing habits, preferences and modes of regulation lead to specific services provided. Institutions such as tradition, belief systems, markets or state planning are the key to understand which ESS are generated from any ESF. Value attribution, mobilisation and appropriation are key processes.

Sustainable growth criteria: Minimum benchmarks and scenarios for employment and the environment

Abstract The relationship of economic growth and environmental impact has spurred fierce debates between growth optimists referring to the phenomenon of the environmental Kuznets curve, and pessimists referring to the limits to growth. However, no operational set of simple criteria has been developed so far to assess the sustainability of a given growth pattern. This is all the more true for measures combining environmental and social criteria. The paper undertakes to sketch out such criteria, and to assess them by applying them to transdiciplinary sustainability scenarios and model simulations with PANTA RHEI, one of the most complex models of the German economy. Theoretical considerations, as well as the empirical work with the model, demonstrate that there are indeed trade offs between economic growth and environmental impacts, and a positive correlation of growth and employment. Nonetheless, it is still possible to develop carefully orchestrated strategies that combine economic competitiveness, low unemployment rates and an easing of the pressure on the environment. Social and technical innovation, reduced working time, a modernised social security system, green taxes and salary increases proportional to labour productivity growth are essential parts of any such strategy. The triple effectiveness of such strategies regarding environmental, social and economic sustainability is demonstrated by the model runs.

Developing a framework for sustainability governance in the European Union

Sustainable development represents a major governance challenge of the 21st century. If societal development trajectories are to be realigned on to more sustainable pathways major changes will be required to existing processes and practices of governance. This essay considers the nature of these changes and discusses implications for social science research.

Assessing ecosystem services for informing land-use decisions: a problem-oriented approach

Assessments of ecosystem services (ES), that aim at informing decisions on land management, are increasing in number around the globe. Despite selected success stories, evidence for ES information being used in decision making is weak, partly because ES assessments are found to fall short in targeting information needs by decision makers. To improve their applicability in practice, we compared existing concepts of ES assessments with focus on informing land use decisions and identified opportunities for enhancing the relevance of ES assessments for decision making. In a process of codesign, building on experience of four projects in Brazil, China, Madagascar, and Vietnam, we developed a step-wise approach for better targeting ES assessments toward information needs in land use decisions. Our problem-oriented approach aims at (1) structuring ES information according to land use problems identified by stakeholders, (2) targeting context-specific ES information needs by decision makers, and (3) assessing relevant management options. We demonstrate how our approach contributes to making ES assessments more policy relevant and enhances the application of ES assessments as a tool for decision support.

From explanation to application: introducing a practice-oriented ecosystem services evaluation (PRESET) model adapted to the context of landscape planning and management

Abstract The development and use of the conceptual framework of ecosystem services (ES) has been very successful in supporting the broad diffusion and application of ES within science and policy communities. However, most of the currently proposed interpretations of the framework neither correlate to environmental planning nor to decision-making contexts at the local and regional scale, which is a potential reason for the slow adoption and practice of the ES conceptual framework. This paper proposes a practice-oriented ES evaluation (PRESET) model specifically adapted to the requirements of local and regional planning and decision-making contexts, and discusses its potential benefits and implications for practice. Through the usage of PRESET we suggest making a distinction between ‘offered ES’, ‘utilized ES’, ‘human input’, and ‘ES benefits’ as relevant information for decision-making. Furthermore, we consider it important to link these decision-support categories to different value dimensions relevant in planning and management practice. PRESET provides guidance to inject the ES concept into planning, but needs to be implemented together with concrete assessment methods, indicators and data. The planning strategic benefits of using PRESET include its reference to existing legislative objectives, avoiding the risk that monetized ES values might dominate decision-making, clarification of human contributions, and easier identification of land use conflicts and synergies. Examples are given for offered and utilized ES, as well as for respective evaluation approaches and instruments of implementation.

Engaging Local Knowledge in Biodiversity Research: Experiences from Large Inter- and Transdisciplinary Projects

Abstract The management of biodiversity represents a research topic that needs to involve not only several (sub-) disciplines from the natural sciences but, in particular, also the social sciences and humanities. Furthermore, over the last couple of years, the need for the integration of other kinds of knowledge (experience based or indigenous knowledge) is increasingly acknowledged. For instance, the incorporation of such knowledge is indispensable for place-based approaches to sustainable land management, which require that the specific ecological and social context is addressed. However, desirable as it may be, such an engagement of the holders of tacit knowledge is not easy to achieve. It demands reconciling well-established scientific procedural standards with the implicit or explicit criteria of relevance that apply in civil society — a process that typically causes severe tensions and comes up against both habitual as well as institutional constraints. The difficulty of managing such tensions is amplified particularly in large integrated projects and represents a major challenge to project management. At the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research — UFZ, several integrated research projects have been conducted over the past years in which experience has been gained with these specific challenges. This paper presents some of the lessons learned from large integrated projects, with an emphasis on project design and management structure. At the centre of the present contribution are experiences gained in the coordination and management of LEGATO (LEGATO stands for Land-use intensity and Ecological EnGineering — Assessment Tools for risks and Opportunities in irrigated rice based production systems, see www.legato-project.net), an ongoing, large-scale, inter- and transdisciplinary research project dealing with the management of irrigated rice landscapes in Southeast Asia. In this project, local expertise on traditional production systems is absolutely crucial but needs to be integrated with natural and social science research to identify future-proof land management systems.