Sustainable Development in the United States: An Experimental Set of Indicators

1
Sustainable Development in the United States An
Experimental Set of Indicators

• September 2001 Final Report Prepared by the
• U.S. Interagency Working Group on Sustainable
  Development Indicators
• Washington, D.C.
• July 2002

2
Overview

• 1. History
• 2. Report Table of Contents
• 3. Report Highlights
• 4. Experimental Indicators
• 5. Web Site
• 6. Current Activities
• 7. Contact Information

3
1. History

• Established in 1996 by Council on Environmental
  Quality/Presidents Council on Sustainable
  Development.
• Interim Report, December 1998 (see next slide)
• Released after extensive OMB Review in May 1999.
• Print version (5,000 distributed- some copies
  still available).
• Web version (100s of requests and 10,000s of
  visits).
• Indicators Mavens Meeting, January 1999
• Day long review meeting at the White House
  Conference Center where experts from state and
  city government, business and the NGO sectors
  reviewed the framework and listed the indicators
  in order of effectiveness.
• Final Report, September 2001 (see Sections 2-4)
• Web version only.
• Living document (print on demand).
• Web Site and Ongoing activities (see Sections 5
  6).

4
HistoryInterim Report, December 1998

• Foreword
• Acknowledgments
• Executive Summary
• Chapter 1. Introduction
• Chapter 2. Sustainable Development A Working
  Definition and a Framework for Indicators
• Chapter 3. Sustainability Issues and Criteria
  for Selecting Indicators
• Chapter 4. An Experimental Set of Sustainable
  Development Indicators
• List of Indicators
• Economic Indicators
• Environmental Indicators
• Social Indicators
• Chapter 5. What the Indicators Do and Do Not Tell
  Us about Sustainable Development
• Chapter 6. Future Work on Sustainable
  Development Indicators
• Appendices
• A. Acronyms
• B. Inventory of Candidate Indicators
• C. Indicators Developed by the OECD, UNCSD, and
  the PCSD
• D. Outreach Efforts
• E. List of Regular Participants U.S. Interagency
  Working Group on Sustainable Development
  Indicators September 1997

5
2. Report Table of ContentsFinal Report,
September 2001

• Foreword
• Acknowledgments
• Executive Summary
• Chapter 1. Concepts of Sustainability
• Chapter 2. Dashboard Presentation
• Chapter 3. List of Indicators
• Economic Indicators
• Environmental Indicators
• Social Indicators
• Chapter 4. Other Indicator Efforts
• Chapter 5. Indicators at the Community Level
• Chapter 6. Indicators for Management in
  Corporations and Government Agencies
• Chapter 7. An Institutional Home for Reporting
  SDI for the US, A Stable Plan for Ongoing Work
• Appendices
• Appendix I Links to Related Internet Sites
• Appendix II Notes on the Relationship Between
  SDI Development and Information for Managers
• Appendix III Indicators for Environmental
  Sustainability
• List of Regular Participants U.S. Interagency
  Working Group on Sustainable Development
  Indicators December 2001

6
3. Report Highlights

• Foreword
• Sustainable development is often defined as
  development that meets the needs of the current
  generation without compromising the ability of
  future generations to meet their needs. In
  our previous report we called it an evolving
  process that improves the economy, the
  environment and society for the benefit of both
  current and future generations. However, when
  considering the needs of our children,
  grandchildren and their children, we have come to
  realize that we do not and can not know their
  needs and wants, nor do we know the technological
  capacities and efficiencies that will be
  available to them.
• Making wise investments that can improve our own
  lives next year and those of our grandchildren
  requires resources and information on current
  conditions and trends. Awareness of what
  opportunities are available and what problems can
  be averted are important inputs to any decision
  about choices that influence the future. We
  hope the indicators and framework presented in
  this report make a contribution to this broadened
  awareness.

7
3. Report Highlights

• Acknowledgments
• This report would have never been possible
  without the help and support of many individuals
  and organizations, both within and outside the
  Federal Government. We would like to extend a
  special thanks to the former White House Office
  of Environmental Quality and its staff,
  particularly Keith Laughlin for his
  encouragement, guidance, and support. We would
  also like to thank all of the Federal agencies
  that participated in the SDI Group and especially
  those that provided staff support that made this
  project possible. The SDI Group would like to
  thank those who have reviewed and provided
  comments on the work of the SDI Group. Their
  input will continue to be important in developing
  a set of indicators that is useful and meaningful
  to policy makers and the public.
• In Memoriam
• We recall our friendship and collaboration with
  Nick Fedoruk, who died of cancer in October 2000.
  Nick donated his time to contribute to the SDI
  Group's efforts for several years. He contributed
  to the community indicators, institutional home
  and executive summary in this report. Thanks
  Nick.

8
3. Report Highlights

• Executive Summary
• In 2001, the Administration began several
  initiatives in preparation for the World Summit
  on Sustainable Development scheduled for
  September 2002 in Johannesburg, South Africa.
  Several agencies also launched with renewed
  vigor, efforts to measure the state of the
  environment or progress toward sustainable
  development. Roundtables on measuring the
  sustainability of forest resources, rangelands,
  minerals and energy were active with Government
  and private sector participation. A similar
  roundtable on water resources has been initiated.
  With this backdrop, members of the Interagency
  Working Group on Sustainable Development
  Indicators (SDI Group) worked to revise and
  update their first report with the intention to
  make a contribution to these efforts.

9
3. Report Highlights

• Executive Summary
• In this report, some indicators have been
  replaced and others were revised to use better
  data or to more closely fit the idea of
  sustainable development. We asked in our first
  report, "How do we know we are making progress?
  And what measures are most useful in evaluating
  our progress"toward sustainability? We are
  working to provide better answers to those
  questions.
• Of the forty, fifteen show trends that result in
  favorable impacts, ten show trends that result in
  unfavorable impacts and fifteen indicators have
  trends that result in mixed or uncertain impacts
  (see next three slides).

10
3. Report Highlights
11
3. Report Highlights
12
3. Report Highlights
13
4. Experimental Indicators

• As we develop a set of indicators we may not be
  tracking some of the fashionable concerns of the
  moment. It is more important to be able to
  compare trends over the years. We need to
  increase integration and simplicity of the SDI
  set and at the same time increase its richness.
  This can be done by decreasing the number and
  increasing the power of the indicators that are
  reported. At the same time, it would be possible
  to show the sub-elements of the aggregated
  indicators for those that wish to "drill down"
  into its data.

14
4. Experimental Indicators

• As we improve the indicator set, we need to
  better our understanding of indicators with
  sudden tipping points or non-linear qualities
  such as runaway inflation or apparent sudden
  failure of fishery resource.
• It will also be desirable to develop leading
  sustainable development indicators, the way there
  are leading economic indicators (such as trends
  in new home construction).
• As the SDI Group entered the process of indicator
  development, we recognized that it would be
  extremely difficult to develop a rigorous and
  satisfactory set of SDI.
• Many of the tasks to be done to improve the set
  of indicators will take a few years to complete.
  With a modest investment, but a high level of
  commitment to seeing the process through, it
  should be possible, if not easy.

15
4. Experimental Indicators

• Capital Assets
• Why is this indicator important?
• What does this indicator show?
• How does this indicator relate to sustainable
  development?
• Figure 3.1. Net Fixed Reproducible Wealth
• Figure 3.2. Investment as a Percentage of GDP

16
4. Experimental Indicators

• Capital Assets
• Why is this indicator important?
• Capital assets are one measure of the economic
  endowment that we pass on to the future. If a
  nation continues to invest sufficiently and
  successfully, its net tangible wealth increases.
  Investment is important because it offsets the
  loss of capital caused by the use and aging of
  structures and equipment and because new
  investment often embodies new technologies that
  increase labor productivity and resource
  efficiency.

17
4. Experimental Indicators

• Capital Assets
• What does this indicator show?
• A common measure of capital assets is the net
  stock of fixed assets and consumer durable goods
  (formerly "fixed reproducible tangible wealth").
  This measure comprises fixed private capital,
  fixed government capital, and consumer durables,
  such as automobiles and other goods with an
  expected service life of three years or more. It
  also includes equipment and structures (such as
  bridges, highways, and houses). This measure
  reflects annual investment and depreciation by
  the private sector and government, but it does
  not include human capital, such as direct
  investments in education and training. Figure
  3.1 shows that since 1988, the net stock of fixed
  assets and consumer durable goods doubled.

18
4. Experimental Indicators

• Capital Assets
• What does this indicator show?
• Labor and the stock of capital, primarily in the
  form of structures and equipment--combined with
  the unmeasured but essential stock of
  knowledge--are used to produce the current output
  of goods and services.
• Figure 3.2 shows the trend in investment as a
  percent of GDP. It reflects the portion of the
  total output of our economic system that is
  devoted to building new productive capacity.

19
4. Experimental Indicators

• Capital Assets
• How does this indicator relate to sustainable
  development?
• The upward trend in capital assets is one
  indicator of our progress in creating a solid
  economic foundation for future generations.
  Investment is relevant to sustainability because
  it is the economic process through which our
  economic endowment is increased.
• The trend shows several notable features. One is
  the reduction of the sensitivity of investment to
  business cycles. Post war management of the
  economic system has so far avoided the sort of
  major declines in investment as a percent of GDP
  that occurred in the Great Depression and the
  mid-1940s. Second, there has been a gradual
  increase in investment as a percent of GDP since
  1960. This is a positive trend for
  sustainability, so long as environmental and
  social endowments are not decreased by the
  investments being made.

20
4. Experimental IndicatorsCapital Assets Figure
3.1. Net Fixed Reproducible Wealth
Source Fixed Assets and Consumer Durable Goods
by Sherby W. Herman, from the April 2000 Survey
of Current Business. Bureau of Economic
Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce.
21
4. Experimental IndicatorsCapital Assets Figure
3.2. Investment as a Percentage of GDP
Source Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S.
Department of Commerce.
22
4. Experimental Indicators

• Status of Stratospheric Ozone
• Why is this indicator important?
• What does this indicator show?
• How does this indicator relate to sustainable
  development?
• Figure 3.23. Stratospheric Ozone Reduction in
  the U.S. Since 1979
• Figure 3.24. South Pole Ozone Hole

23
4. Experimental Indicators

• Status of Stratospheric Ozone
• Why is this indicator important?
• The stratospheric ozone layer shields the Earth
  from harmful ultraviolet (UV)-B radiation.
  Reduced stratospheric ozone allows more UV-B
  radiation to reach the earth, and this is harmful
  to many species and is related to an increased
  incidence of skin cancer in humans.

24
4. Experimental Indicators

• Status of Stratospheric Ozone
• What does this indicator show?
• Human activities that result in the emission of
  gases that contain chlorine and bromine have
  resulted in the depletion of stratospheric ozone.
  Figure 3.23 shows that the average monthly total
  column ozone over the United States has declined
  by about 7 since 1979 (based on measurements at
  Fresno, California Boulder, Colorado Nashville,
  Tennessee and Wallops Island, Virginia). The
  largest ozone depletions related to chlorine and
  bromine emissions have been observed in
  Antarctica during the austral spring. Figure 3.25
  shows that more than 50 of the springtime ozone
  at the South Pole has been lost compared to
  pre-1970 values.
• Regulations on the emission of certain
  ozone-depleting gases became effective on January
  1, 1996. NOAA measurements indicate that the
  total ozone depleting potential of these gases
  reached a peak at the surface in 1994, presumably
  due to steps taken in anticipation of the
  regulations. Based on this data, the
  concentrations of these ozone-depleting gases in
  the stratosphere are expected to peak by the turn
  of the century.

25
4. Experimental Indicators

• Status of Stratospheric Ozone
• How does this indicator relate to sustainable
  development?
• Loss of the stratospheric ozone layer would
  likely lead to wide-spread impacts on ecology,
  agriculture, and human health and thus is
  incompatible with sustainable development.
• Reference
• NOAA Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics
  Laboratory (CMDL), Summary Review (Bi-Annual)
  NOAA Climate Prediction Center, Northern
  Hemisphere Winter Summary.

26
4. Experimental IndicatorsStatus of
Stratospheric Ozone Figure 3.23.Stratospheric
Ozone Reduction in the U.S. Since 1979
Source Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics
Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
27
4. Experimental IndicatorsStatus of
Stratospheric Ozone Figure 3.24. South Pole
Ozone Hole
Source Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics
Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
28
4. Experimental Indicators

• Access to the Internet
• Why is this indicator important?
• What does this indicator show?
• How does this indicator relate to sustainable
  development?
• Figure 3.47 Percent of U.S. Households with a
  Computers and Internet Access

29
4. Experimental Indicators

• Access to the Internet
• Why is this indicator important?
• The internet is becoming an increasingly vital
  tool in our society. It offers an efficient,
  low-cost and democratic means of distributing and
  sharing diverse information and ideas around the
  world. Americans in increasing numbers are using
  the internet to conduct such day-to-day
  activities as business, correspondence, research
  and information-gathering, desktop publishing,
  democratic deliberation and political activism.
  Thus, each year, being digitally connected
  becomes ever more critical to educational,
  social, democratic and economic advancement. The
  vast information available on the internet can be
  seen as a new part of our social endowment.
  People who lack access to those tools are at a
  growing disadvantage. An essential component of
  sustainability is equitable access to resources
  and this inevitably includes access to
  information.

30
4. Experimental Indicators

• Access to the Internet
• What does this indicator show?
• The rapid growth of the internet occurring among
  most Americans, regardless of income, education,
  race or ethnicity, location, age, or gender,
  suggests that digital inclusion is a realizable
  goal. For example, the share of households with
  internet access soared by 58, rising from 26.2
  in December 1998 to 41.5 in August 2000. The
  share of Americans using the Internet rose from
  32.7 in December 1998 to 44.4 in August 2000.
• While the "Digital Divide" (the concept that
  society is separated into the information rich
  and the information poor.) is still quite wide
  (and in a few cases expanding further), groups
  that have traditionally been digital "have-nots"
  are now making gains.

31
4. Experimental Indicators

• Access to the Internet
• How does this indicator relate to sustainable
  development?
• The internet is a powerful global medium of free
  expression as it facilitates transboundary
  information and opinion sharing which are
  fundamental to the democratic process. How it
  will continue to influence the broader trends in
  society has yet to be seen, however we do know
  that it is also an important resource in our
  efforts to create sustainability in an
  information-based democratic society.
• Reference
• Falling Through the Net Toward Digital
  Inclusion, a Report on Access to Technology
  Tools, October, 2000. http//www.ntia.doc.gov/nti
  ahome/fttn00/contents00.html, National
  Telecommunications and Information
  Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

32
4. Experimental IndicatorsAccess to the
Internet Figure 3.47 Percent ofU.S. Households
with a Computers and Internet Access
Source National Telecommunications and
Information Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce.
33
5. Web Sitehttp//www.sdi.gov/

• 5.1 Home Page
• 5.2 Feedback
• 5.3 Reports and Databases
• 5.4 Links to Related Sites
• 5.5 Web Server Technology

34
5.1 Home Page
35
5.2 Feedback
36
5.3 Reports and Databases
37
5.3 Reports and Databases
38
5.4 Links to Related Sites
39
5.5 Web Server Technology
40
5.5 Web Server Technology
41
5.5 Web Server Technology

• Technology
• Dell PowerEdge 2400 Web Server (high-end).
• Microsoft Windows 2000 Server (dual processor).
• Microsoft Office 2000 Premium (Excel, PhotoDraw,
  FrontPage and other standard Web authoring
  tools).
• State-of-the-art statistical analysis tools
  (Insightful S-PLUS and Graphlets).
• State-of-the-art XML Web Services authoring tools
  for electronic publishing and archiving on CD/DVD
  (NextPages NXT 3 and Folio Views).

42
5.5 Web Server Technology

• Resources
• Key Sustainable Development and Industrial
  Ecology reports.
• Digital Library of the State of the Environment
• Started at EPA 1991-1994
• Continued at DOI 1994-1997
• Continued at EPA 1997-present
• Environmental Node on the FedGov Content Network
  (FedStats.Net, XML.Gov, and e-Gov).
• Archive of Reports, Metadata. and Statistical
  Databases.

43
6. Current Activities

• Dashboard of Indicators and Drill-down to Local
  Indicators
• Secretariat Staff
• CEQ World Summit on Sustainable Development
  (WSSD)
• Ted Heinz and David Berry
• Sustainability Water Resources Roundtable (SWRR)
• Tim Smith
• http//water.usgs.gov/wicp/acwi/swrr
• Support for EPA State of the Environmental Report
  and Environmental Indicator Initiative
• Coordination
• Ted Heinz and David Berry
• Metadata for indicators
• Brand Niemann
• Re-design of Community Indicators Web Site
• Tim Stuart and Grecia Matos

44
7. Contact Information

• David Berry, Executive Director, IWGSDI
• David_Berry_at_ios.doi.gov
• 202-208-4839
• Ted Heintz, Associate Director, Office of Policy,
  US Department of the Interior (IWGSDI Host)
• Theodore_Heintz_at_ios.doi.gov
• 202-208-4939
• Grecia Matos, Report Author and Editor, IWGSDI
• Grecia_Matos_at_ios.doi.gov
• 202-208-4923
• Brand Niemann, Webmaster, IWGSDI
• bniemann_at_cox.net
• 202-566-1657