Measuring the immeasurable — A survey of sustainability indices

Abstract

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar.Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW.Download this ZEW Discussion Paper from our ftp server:ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp06073.pdf Nontechnical SummaryNational sustainability indices provide a one-dimensional metric to valuate country-specific information on the three holistic dimensions of sustainable development: economic, environmental, and social conditions. At the policy level, they suggest an unambiguous yardstick against which a country's development can be measured and even a cross-country comparison can be performed. However it remains questionable whether we can meaningfully speak from unambiguousness in the holistic subject of sustainability development.This paper reviews the consistency and meaningfulness of eleven sustainability indices that We find that -although the sustainability indices are imputed to be concise and transparentthey fail to meet fundamental scientific requirements with respect to the three central steps of indices formation: normalization, weighting, and aggregation. Normalization and weighting of indicators -which in general are associated with subjective judgments -reveal a high degree of arbitrariness without mentioning or systematically assessing critical assumptions.As to aggregation, there are scientific rules which could guarantee consistency and meaningfulness of composite indices. Yet, these rules are often not taken into account. As a consequence, sustainability indices currently employed in policy practice are doomed to be useless if not misleading with respect to concrete policy advice. Abstract. Sustainability indices for countries provide a one-dimensional metric to valuate country-specific information on the three dimensions of sustainable development: economic, environmental, and social conditions. At the policy level, they suggest an unambiguous yardstick against which a country's development can be measured and even a cross-country comparison can be performed. This paper reviews the explanatory power of various sustainability indices applied in policy practice. We show that these indices fail to fulfill fundamental scientific requirements making them rather useless if not misleading with respect to policy advice. Measuring the Immeasurable - A Survey of Sustainability Indices

Uma proposta para avaliação da sustentabilidade socioambiental utilizando suporte analítico e gráfico

“…Além disso, a avaliação da sustentabilidade tem o propósito de comunicar aos stakeholders os esforços e o progresso de uma organização nas dimensões econômica, ambiental e social (Böhringer & Jochem, 2007;Lozano, 2006;Ness et al, 2007;Singh et al, 2009;Wilson et al, 2007).…”

“…Böhringer & Jochem (2007) corroboram essas afirmações, dizendo que atualmente há um forte interesse na avaliação da prosperidade econômica, da qualidade ambiental e da coerência social.…”

“…Segundo Böhringer & Jochem (2007), o que não pode ser claramente medido é difícil melhorar ou atingir. Assim, a avaliação da sustentabilidade representa um papel fundamental no alcance da sustentabilidade, visto que indicam os pontos fracos e fortes das empresas em relação ao seu desempenho econômico, social e ambiental.…”

A comparative analysis of the sustainability of rice cultivation technologies using the analytic network process

“…But it has been shown that many internationally publicized composite sustainability indicators neglect basic scientific rules for the selection of input variables, normalization and weighting of these variables and also formal conditions for meaningful aggregation (Böhringer and Jochem, 2007).…”

Resilient but not sustainable? Public perceptions of shale gas development via hydraulic fracturing

“…Sustainability is notorious as an extremely poorly defined and operationalized concept (Böhringer and Jochem 2007, Wilson et al 2007, Davidson 2010, Mori and Christodoulou 2012. For example, differing measures of national sustainability have placed the same nation in the top five in the world on one metric while in the bottom five in the world on a different metric (Wilson et al 2007).…”