Sustainable development: methodical approaches and key indicators of assessment
The problem of measuring and assessing the level of sustainable development of the territories (country, region, city) is extremely relevant. The achievement of sustainable development allows simultaneously solving existing problems in the economic sphere, preserving the quality of the environment and improving the social sphere.
Unfortunately, there is still no universally accepted and effective method of measuring and evaluating sustainable development in the world. In this regard, the study of existing evaluation methods is timely and appropriate. Due to the obtaining of reliable results it is possible to eliminate existing problems and improve the state of the socio-ecological and economic system in the country.Issues of sustainable development are reflected in the works of Ukrainian and foreign scientists. Among Ukrainian scientists, sustainable development was studied by: G. Domaradzka, L. Gromozdova, N. Demchenko, A. Klimenko, L. Rudenko, S. Lisovsky, Marunyak and other researchers. Among foreign scientists, issues of sustainable development were studied: David Pearce, Harvey Brooks, Michael Ben-Eli, Louisee McRae, Stefanie Deinet, Robin Freeman, J. Ram Pillarisetti, Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh and other.
The purpose of the study is to analyze the existing methodical approaches to the development of a system of indicators of sustainable development and the choice of the most optimal for Ukraine.
The UN conference in Rio de Janeiro on environment and development (UNCED) was the beginning of a global sustainable development programming process, inspired by the Agenda 21 action program. This program led to the development of indicators needed to assess sustainable development. Since then, the development and elaboration indicators of sustainable development in many international organizations and at many levels of administration has been going on.
In particular, in UN organization, the World Bank, in the organization of economic cooperation and development of industrial countries of the OECD, in EU organization and networks of European cities, as well as in government, regional and local government. During the time, many universities and institutes from different countries, as well as many professional and public organizations, participated in the development of evaluation methods and tools. In this connection, a study of existing methods for assessing sustainable development is expedient and timely.It is important to note that there is still no generally accepted term «sustainable development», which indicates the importance of this category of knowledge. The authors' opinions are summarized in Table 3.5.
Interpretation of the term «sustainable development»
Table 3.5
| Interpretation of the term | Author and source |
| Sustainability therefore implies something about maintaining the level of human well-being so that it might improve but at least never declines (or, not more than temporarily, anyway). Interpreted this way, sustainable development becomes equivalent to some requirement that well-being does not decline through time | David Pearce [1, 48] |
| For the concept of sustainability in the process of development to be operationally useful it must be more than just an expression of social values or political preferences disguised in scientific language. Ideally it should be defined so that one could specify a set of measurable criteria such that individual and groups with widely differing values, political preferences, or assumptions about human nature could agree whether the criteria are being met in a concrete development program | Harvey Brooks [2, 30] |
| Sustainable development is a harmonious, balanced, non-conflict progress of all earthly civilizations, groups of countries (regions, subregions), as well as individual countries based on scientifically grounded plans (systematic approach), when in the process of steady innovation intensive (and not extensive) economic development At the same time, the countries are resolutely resolved a set of issues related to environmental protection, the elimination of exploitation, poverty and discrimination of every single individual, as well as of entire peoples or groups of people, including ethnic, racial or sexual characteristics | Herman Daly [3, 37] |
| Sustainable development is a dynamic equilibrium in the process of interaction between a population and the carrying capacity of its environment such that the population develops to express its full potential without producing irreversible, adverse effects on the carrying capacity of the environment upon which it depends | Michael Ben-Eli [4, 3] |
| Sustainable development is the management of the basic total capital of a society in the interests of preserving and enhancing human capabilities | World Bank [5] |
| Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs | World Commission on Environment and Development [6, 24] |
*Compiled by the authors
The concept of sustainable development is based on certain principles of the first order (basic) and second order (special).
At the same time, each country transforms them according to their specific conditions. In this case, the transformations mostly concern the second group. But even the principles of the basic order often have different significance for different regional levels: some of them are relevant for mankind as a whole; others are more significant at the regional or local level. Almost all the principles of sustainable development aredetermined by the main goal of the concept: the survival of humanity, and therefore, the preservation of the biosphere, without a satisfactory state of which this survival becomes impossible.
The principles of the classification of sustainable development, developed by Michael Ben-Eli [4, 4-9], are presented in Table 3.6.
Table 3.6
Principles of sustainable development by Michael Ben-Eli
| Number of principle | Description of principles | Policy and operational implications |
| The first principle | Contain entropy and ensure that the flow of resources, through and within the economy, is as nearly nondeclining as is permitted by physical laws | Strive for highest resource productivity; employ continuously recycle non-regenerative resources; affect an unbroken, closed-loop flow of matter and energy in a planetary production infrastructure conceived as a whole; advance a service, performance-leasing orientation for managing durable goods |
| The second principle | Adopt an appropriate accounting system to guide the economy, fully aligned with the planet’s ecological processes and reflecting true, comprehensive biospheric pricing | Employ a comprehensive concept of wealth related to the simultaneous enhancement of five key forms of capital: natural, human, social, manufactured and financial; align the world’s economy with nature’s regeneration capacity and incorporate critical «externalities» in all cost and benefit accounts; design regulation and taxation policies to accentuate desirable and eliminate adverse outcomes, optimizing the whole |
| The third principle | Ensure that the essential diversity of all forms of life in the biosphere is maintained | Assume responsible stewardship for our planet’s web of life; harvest species only to regeneration capacity; conserve the variety of the existing gene pool; shape land use patterns to reduce human encroachment on other forms of life and enhance biological diversity in areas of human habitat |
| The fourth principle | Maximize degrees of freedom and potential self-realization of all humans without any individual or group adversely affecting others | Foster tolerance as a cornerstone of social interactions; enshrine universal rights within a framework of planetary citizenship; provide for inclusion and effective democracy in governance; establish cooperation as a basis for managing global issues and planetary commons; eliminate war and outlaw trade in weapons technologies; promote sustainability literacy through education at all levels |
| The fifth principle | Recognize the seamless, dynamic continuum of mystery, wisdom, love, energy, and matter. That links | Seek to understand and fulfill humanity’s unique function in the Universe; honor the Earth with its intricate ecology, of which humans are an integral part; link inner |
the outer reaches of the cosmos with our solar system, planet and its biosphere including all humans, with internal metabolic systems and their externalized technology extensions;
transformation of individuals to
transformations in the social collective, laying foundations for the emergence of a new planetary consciousness
embody this recognition in a universal ethics for guiding human actions
*Compiled by the authors [4, 4-9]
An elaboration indicator for sustainable development is carried out using two main approaches:
First approach is found on construction of an Integrated Aggregate Sustainability Measures (ASM) Integral Index, which is usually based on three groups of indicators: ecological and economical; ecological-socio-economic and ecological. The main difficulty in aggregating information in the indexes is to determine the weights of the initial indexes without losing significance and without excessive subjectivity.
Second approach is based on construction a Sustainability Performance Indicators (SPI) system, which reflects some aspects of sustainable development. Sustainability performance indicators are used to measure a company's performance and to monitor and report on future progress. SPIs can be grouped in three indicators: economic performance indicators (company turnover, profit, quantity of products sold); social performance indicators (labor practices, human rights, and broader issues affecting consumers, community, and other stakeholders in society), environmental performance indicators (greenhouse gas emissions, water consumption, waste output).
From the point of view of practical use and management activities, an approach based on the assessment of sustainable development using an integral indicator than a system of indicators is more attractive.
Integral indicators are convenient for assessing current and forecasting future development trends, clearly characterizing the degree of sustainability, balance and trajectory of movement of the main aspects of growth: economic, social and environmental.The use of indicators in the process of analysis sustainable development permits to solve the following tasks [7, 67]:
measuring various aspects of sustainable development, including economic, environmental and social components;
diagnosing problems of sustainable development in the system;
interpretation dynamics of the processes occurring in the system (increase or decrease sustainable development);
informing the participants about the state of the system and development trend;
accelerating the exchange of scientific and technical information;
mobilization participants of the process for solve the problem in sustainable development sphere;
justification of managerial decisions in the field of sustainable development.
It should be noted that in September were adopted The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. All countries agreed to work to achieve these goals by 2030. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals are identified in a list of 169 SDG goals. Progress towards these targets is coordinated to track on 232 unique indicators. For many indicators data is available, but key data gaps remain. The characteristics of the goals are presented in the Table 3.7.
Table 3.7
The 17 Development Goals
| Number of goals | Description of the goals |
| Goal 1 | End poverty in all its forms everywhere |
| Goal 2 | End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture |
| Goal 3 | Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages |
| Goal 4 | Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all |
| Goal 5 | Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls |
| Goal 6 | Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all |
| Goal 7 | Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all; |
| Goal 8 | Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all |
| Goal 9 | Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation |
| Goal 10 | Reduce inequality within and among countries |
| Goal 11 | Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable |
| Goal 12 | Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns |
| Goal 13 | Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts |
| Goal 14 | Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development |
| Goal 15 | Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss |
| Goal 16 | Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels |
| Goal 17 | Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development (Finance, Technology, Capacity-building, Trade, Systemic issues) |
*Compiled by the authors [8, 1-21]
Each goal has its own sub-goals, the implementation of which can be assessed by a specific indicator.
All Indicators are divided into main groups:Indicators of social aspects of sustainable development.
Indicators of economic aspects of sustainable development.
Indicators of ecological aspects of sustainable development (including characteristics of water, land, atmosphere, other natural resources, as well as waste).
Indicators of institutional aspects of sustainable development (programming and policy planning, scientific developments, international legal instruments, information provision, strengthening the role of major groups of the population).
The indicated indicators require special transformations, adaptation to specific conditions, and in some cases, an extension for individual countries. In turn, indicators are divided into three categories, taking into account their target orientation:
Indicators are the driving force that characterizes human activity, processes and characteristics that affect sustainable development;
State indicators characterizing the current state of various aspects of sustainable development;
Response indicators allow for a political or some other way of responding to change the current state.
In Ukraine, throughout the 2017 year, an open process of adapting sustainable development goals to national conditions took place at the initiative of the government and with the assistance of the UN system. In the national report «The goals of sustainable development of Ukraine» [9] are given goals and objectives that should ensure the integration of efforts for economic growth, social justice and rational nature management. The objectives of the SDGs were developed on the basis of key priorities for achieve the goal. To study progress towards national SDGs a system of key indicators has been established, which should be based on monitoring. When selecting national indicators for achieving the SDGs, an attempt was made find a balance between the advantage of obtaining additional information, important to the national context, and the additional burden reporting that arises in connection with the preparation of these indicators. In addition, in order to minimize the number of indicators, the preference it was given to multipurpose indicators.
Comparative analysis of the tasks of sustainable development at global and national levels in Ukraine is presented in Table 3.8.
Currently, Ukraine has developed 124 indicators of sustainable development out of 172, relative to the characteristics of the national economy.
Overview of the available information base for monitoring indicators achieving sustainable development goals defined for Ukraine testifies:
Table 3.8
Comparative analysis of the tasks of sustainable development at global and national levels
| Sustainable development goals, quantity | Sustainable development tasks, quantity | Sustainable development indicators, quantity | |||
| Global level | National level | Global level | National level | Global level | National level |
| 17 | 17 | 169 | 86 | 241 | 172 |
*Compiled by the authors [9; 10]
basic metadata can be presented for 124 indicators, makes up 72,1% of the total, identified for monitoring achieving set objectives;
remain uncertain metadata for 48 indicators among which information over 20 indicators provided to get by conducting new research [10].
Despite the numerous numbers of indicators, the most well-known development indicators that are used in the world practice presented below:
1. Genuine Savings. The World Bank (1997) [5] proposed the original genuine savings rate. It has been modified in subsequent years (now re-named Adjusted Net Saving) and is currently calculated as [17, 5]:
where: GS is genuine savings rate, GDS is gross domestic savings;
Dp is depreciation of physical capital;
EDU is current expenditure on education;
Rn i is the rent from depletion of i-th natural capital (energy, mineral and forest depletion are included);
CO2 damage is damage from carbon dioxide emissions (currently estimated as US $20 per ton of carbon times the number of tons of carbon emitted);
GNI is gross national income at market prices;
PM10 damage is based on the estimate of particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter for all cities with a population of 100,000 or more and is measured using willingness-to-pay to avoid mortality due to particulate emissions.
GS is based on «weak sustainability», which assumes perfect sustainability between physical, natural and human capital. A negative GS value implies that welfare is expected to decline the future.
2. The Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI) [17, 6]. Was developed by the Yale Centre for Environmental Law and Policy. It uses 76 data sets (e.g., natural resource endowments, pollution levels, environmental management efforts etc.) integrated into 21 indicators (I), with each indicator given an equal weight (w):
These 21 indicators fall into broad categories: (i) environmental system, (ii) reducing environmental stresses, (iii) reducing human vulnerability to environmental stresses, (iv) societal and institutional capacity to respond to environmental challenges and (v) global stewardship. A higher score implies that a country is relatively better positioned to maintain favorable environmental conditions for the future.
While a negative value for GS or ecological balance implies unsustainable development, it is difficult to specify a threshold level for the ESI such that any ESI score above it can be considered to identify a sustainable development path.
3. Environmentally adjusted net domestic product (EDP) [11]. Description of the unit of environmental accounting. It is obtained by subtracting the depletion of the natural product and environmental degradation from the net domestic product (NDP). Contributions to the NDP and EDP by production sector are called value added (VA) and Environmentally Adjusted Value Added (EVA), respectively. EDP I, which takes into account only depletion of natural resources, can be distinguished from EDP II, which takes into account both depletion and environmental degradation
4. The Living Planet Index (LPI) [12; 13]. Is a measure of the state of the world's biological diversity based on population trends of vertebrate species from terrestrial, freshwater and marine habitats. The LPI has been adopted by the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) as an indicator of progress towards its 2011-2020 targets to «take effective and urgent action to halt the loss of biodiversity». The LPI is based on trends of thousands of population time series collected from monitored sites around the world. This online portal allows searching for and contributing data.
To calculate an LPI, a generalised additive modelling framework is used to determine the underlying trend in each population time-series. Average rates of change are then calculated and aggregated to the species level. For the global LPI, the method of aggregation has recently been revised to include a weighting system which gives trends from more species-rich systems, realms and groups more weight in the final index.
5. The «Ecological footprint» [17, 5-6] is calculated by the Global Footprint Network, which expresses the degree of human pressure on the environment in the form of areas of land and water needed for the extraction of resources and waste disposal. The Footprint helps: countries improve sustainability and well-being; local leaders optimize public project investments; individuals understand their impact on the planet.
6. Human Development Index (HDI) [14]. The HDI was created to emphasize that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for
assessing the development of a country, not economic growth alone. The HDI can also be used to question national policy choices, asking how two countries with the same level of GNI per capita can end up with different human development outcomes. These contrasts can stimulate debate about government policy priorities. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of average achievement in key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable and have a decent standard of living. The HDI is the geometric mean of normalized indices for each of the three dimensions.
The health dimension is assessed by life expectancy at birth; the education dimension is measured by mean of years of schooling for adults aged 25 years and more and expected years of schooling for children of school entering age. The standard of living dimension is measured by gross national income per capita. The HDI uses the logarithm of income, to reflect the diminishing importance of income with increasing GNI. The scores for the three HDI dimension indices are then aggregated into a composite index using geometric mean. Refer to technical notes for more details.
The HDI simplifies and captures only part of what human development entails. It does not reflect on inequalities, poverty, human security, empowerment, etc. The HDRO offers the other composite indices as broader proxy on some of the key issues of human development, inequality, gender disparity and poverty. A fuller picture of a country’s level of human development requires analysis of other indicators and information presented in the statistical annex of the report.
7. The Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) [15]. A genuine progress indicator (GPI) is a metric used to measure the economic growth of a country. It is often considered an alternative metric to the more well known gross domestic product (GDP) economic indicator. The GPI indicator takes everything the GDP uses into account, but adds other figures that represent the cost of the negative effects related to economic activity (such as the cost of crime, cost of ozone depletion and cost of resource depletion, among others). The GPI nets the positive and negative results of economic growth to examine whether or not it has benefited people overall.
8. The green gross domestic product (green GDP or GGDP) [16]. Is an index of economic growth with the environmental consequences of that growth factored into a country’s conventional GDP. Green GDP monetizes the loss of biodiversity, and accounts for costs caused by climate change. Calculating green GDP requires that net natural capital consumption, including resource depletion, environmental degradation, and protective and restorative environmental initiatives, be subtracted from traditional GDP. Some early calculations of green GDP take into account one or two but not all environmental adjustments. These calculations can also be applied to net domestic product (NDP), which deducts the depreciation of produced capital from GDP. In each case, it is necessary to convert the resource activity into a monetary value, since it is in this manner that indicators are generally expressed in national accounts.
So, the main disadvantage of a system of indicators of sustainable development is the use of complex and expensive procedures. Obtaining information necessary for the calculation of certain indicators is sometimes quite problematic. Especially if the work of the statistical service is not adjusted. These problems can significantly complicate the practical application of the developed indicators for assessing sustainability in developing countries and regions, including Ukraine.
Thus, based on the results of the analysis of various methodological approaches to the assessment of sustainable development, we can draw the following conclusions. The concept of sustainable development involves the analysis of at least three aspects of the sustainability of an economic system: ecological, economic and social. Some scholars emphasize a fourth aspect: institutional. The analysis of these aspects requires the use of special indicators, measured by different values. From the point of view of practical use and management activities, an approach based on the assessment of sustainable development using an integral indicator than a system of indicators is more attractive. Integral indicators are convenient for assessing current and forecasting future development trends, clearly characterizing the degree of sustainability, balance and trajectory of movement of the main aspects of growth: economic, social and environmental. However, the development and practical application of integral indicators of sustainability is associated with a number of methodological problems. The main problem of forming an integrated assessment of sustainable development is the need to take into account and integrate indicators describing various aspects of development and having different dimensions. Solving this problem requires the use of complex processing and aggregation procedures. Obtaining information necessary for the calculation of certain indicators is sometimes quite problematic and is a very expensive procedure. Especially if the work of the statistical service is not adjusted. These problems can significantly complicate the practical application of the developed indicators for assessing sustainability in developing countries and regions, including Ukraine. The ambiguity of its solution caused the emergence of a large number of methodological approaches, adapted to the characteristics of the national economy.
References:
1. Pearce, D. W. (1993). Economic Values and the Natural World. London: Earthscan.
2. Brooks, H. (1992). Sustainability and technology, in Science and Sustainability. Laxenburg: Austria.
3. Daly, E. H. (2007). Ecological Economics and Sustainable Development, Selected Essays of Herman Daly. MPG Books Ltd: Bodmin, Cornwall.
4. Ben-Eli, M. (2015). Sustainability: Definition and five core principles. The Sustainability Laboratory: New York.
5. World bank. Retrievedfrom http:wdi.worldbank.org tables
6. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common
Future. (1987). Retrieved from https://www.are.admin.ch/are/en/home/sustainable- development/international-cooperation/2030agenda/unmilestones-in-sustainable-develop ment/1987--brundtland-report.html#45 1472540548334_______________________________________________ content_are_en_home_
nachhaltige-entwicklunginternationale-zusammenarbeitagenda-2030-fuer-nachhaltige- entwicklunguno--meilensteine-zur-nachhaltigen-entwicklung 1987--brundtland- bericht_jcrcontent_par_tabs
7. Korchagina, E. V. (2012). Metody otsenki ustoichivogo razvitiia regionalnykh sotsialno-ekonomicheskikh system [Methods for assessing the sustainable development of regional socio-economic systems]. Problemy Sovremennoi Ekonomiki - Problems Of The Modern Economy, 1 (41), 67-71 [in Russian].
8. Global indicator framework for the Sustainable Development Goals and targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. (2018). Retrieved from https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/Global%20Indicator%20Framework%20after%20refi nementEng.pdf
9. Sustainable Development Goals Ukraine. National Baseline Report. (2017).
Retrievedfrom http://www.un.org.ua/images/SDGs_NationalReportEN_Web.pdf
10. Derzhavna sluzhba statystyky v Ukraini [State Statistics Service in Ukraine] Retrievedfrom http://www.ukrstat.gov.ua/
11. United Nation Statistics Division. Retrieved from
https://unstats.un.org/unsd/environmentgl/gesform.asp?getitem=467
12. Living Planet Index. Retrievedfrom http://livingplanetindex.org/home/index
13. McRae, L., Deinet, S., Freeman, R. (2017). The Diversity-Weighted Living Planet Index: Controlling Taxonomic Bias in a Global Biodiversity Indicator. Retrieved from https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0169156
14. Human Development Index (HDI). United Nations Development Programme. Retrievedfrom http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi
15. Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI). Retrieved from
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/gpi.asp
16. Green gross domestic product. Retrieved from
https://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_gross_domestic_product
17. Pillarisetti, J. R., Bergh, C.J.M. (2007). Sustainable Nations: What do Aggregate Indicators Tell Us? Retrievedfrom https://papers.tinbergen.nl/08012.pdf
3.5.