Top

Social Indicators Research

Published in:

24-02-2017

The Ex-Ante Evaluation of Achieving Sustainable Development Goals

Authors: Lorenza Campagnolo, Carlo Carraro, Fabio Eboli, Luca Farnia, Ramiro Parrado, Roberta Pierfederici

Published in: Social Indicators Research | Issue 1/2018

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

This paper describes the methodology and main results from an overall assessment on future achievement of sustainable development goals. The proposed approach consists of a model-based, looking forward composite sustainable development index—FEEM sustainability index—projected to the future. It represents a first experiment to reproduce the future dynamics of sustainable development indicators over time and worldwide and to assess future sustainability under different scenarios. The assessment presented here is relevant under different viewpoints. First, it has a very broad nature in terms of both geographical coverage and meaningfulness: it considers the multi-dimensional structure of sustainable development by combining relevant indicators belonging to economic, social and environmental pillars for the whole world. Second, the modelling framework to compute future trends of indicators relies upon a recursive-dynamic computable general equilibrium model. This is an ideal tool to look simultaneously at the development of many indicators, their potential interactions and trade-offs, and more in general to the consequences of economic development and/or policies aiming to increase performance in one or more indicators; it allows measuring the overall sustainability under alternative scenarios, across countries and over time. Finally, regarding the construction of the composite indicator, the application of fuzzy measures and Choquet integral increases substantially the model capability allowing taking into account the interactions that exist among the three main pillars of sustainability and the considered indicators.

previous article One Size Fits All? The Validity of a Composite Poverty Index Across Urban and Rural Households in South Africa

next article Estimation of Joint Income-Wealth Poverty: A Sensitivity Analysis

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

An indicator is a “quantitative or a qualitative measure derived from a series of observed facts that can reveal relative positions (e.g., relative position of a country) in a given area” (OECD 2008). It should be exhaustive and concise, quantifying and aggregating data regarding to a specific aspect, enabling to assess change in time and giving insight on the reasons for change. UN CSD (2012a, b) provides a broader) definition: “A statistical measure that gives an indication on the sustainability of social, environmental and economic development”.

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?menu=1130.

http://www.greengrowthknowledge.org/Pages/GGKPHome.aspx.

http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/index_en.htm.

http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/.

Even institutions that normally adopt other approaches/models such as the World Bank (WB), the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have started to use the MDG indicators as a standard reference.

http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/report-2013/2013_progress_english.pdf.

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs.

http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/.

Carraro et al. (2013) report methodology and results for a previous version delivered in 2011. This paper shows results of the 2013 release. The full set of result of the 2013 release is available at www.feemsi.org.

A complete description of indicators of FEEM SI can be found in the Appendix 1.

Also http://www.feem-web.it/ices/.

The algorithm is available in R Cran under the kappalab package.

This section provides a short overview of results. The whole set of results is available at http://www.feemsi.org/pag/results.php.

http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/ddc/ar5_scenario_process/RCPs.html; http://tntcat.iiasa.ac.at:8787/RcpDb/dsd?Action=htmlpage&page=welcome.

http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/ddc/ar5_scenario_process/parallel_nat_scen.html; https://secure.iiasa.ac.at/web-apps/ene/SspDb/dsd?Action=htmlpage&page=about.

Country details are also available at http://www.feemsi.org/pag/results_baseline_data_bubbles_all.php.

As usual, it is possible to play with dimension to see a number of cause-effects relationship between different pillars.

The deployment of nuclear energy can raise both social and environmental concerns. By now, FEEM SI does not present a specific indicator for nuclear as there is no agreement on how can be treated in terms of contribution to sustainable development (are more important the environmental costs related to nuclear waste disposal or the environmental benefits due to the non-fossil fuels based energy provided?).

ICES model is solved using the software GEMPACK (General Equilibrium Modelling PACKage): http://www.copsmodels.com/gempack.htm.

GTAP 7 database considers 113 macro-regions and 57 production sectors for the year 2007; ICES-SI aggregates it in 40 macro-regions and 19 production sectors (Tables 13, 14).

The GTAP—Global Trade Analysis Project-model (Hertel 1997) has been used increasingly in the last fifteen-twenty years to assess international trade policy topics.

http://www.materialflows.net/home/.

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/environment/municipalwaste.htm.

Adelle, C., & Pallemaerts, M. (2009). Sustainable development indicators—An overview of relevant framework programme funded research and identification of further needs in view of EU and international activities. European Communities. http://www.ieep.eu/assets/443/sdi_review.pdf.

Armington, P. S. (1969). A theory of demand for products distinguished by place of production (pp. 159–176). IMF: International Monetary Fund Staff Papers.

Boehringer, C., & Loeschel, A. (2006). Computable general equilibrium models for sustainability impact assessment: Status quo and prospects. Ecological Economics, 60, 49–64.CrossRef

Burniaux, J.-M., & Truong, T.P. (2002). GTAP-E: An energy environmental version of the GTAP model. GTAP technical paper n. 16.

Campagnolo, L., Carraro, C., Davide, M., Eboli, F., Lanzi, E., & Parrado, R. (2016). Can climate policy enhance sustainability?”. Climatic Change, 137, 639–653. Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.CrossRef

Carraro, C., Campagnolo, L., Eboli, F., Giove, S., Lanzi, E., Parrado, R., et al. (2013). The FEEM sustainability index: An integrated tool for sustainability assessment. In M. G. Erechtchoukova et al. (Eds.), Sustainability appraisal: Quantitative methods and mathematical techniques for environmental performance evaluation, EcoProduction. Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32081-1_2.

Eboli, F., Parrado, R., & Roson, R. (2010). Climate change feedback on economic growth: Explorations with a dynamic general equilibrium model. Environment and Development Economics, 15(5), 515–533.CrossRef

Farnia, L., & Giove, S. (2015). Fuzzy measures and experts’ opinion elicitation—An application to the FEEM sustainable composite indicator. Smart Innovation, System and Technologies, 37, 229–241.CrossRef

Farnia, L., & Silvestri, A. (2015). 2015 ICCG climate think tank ranking. Available: http://www.thinktankmap.org/FilePagineStatiche/Documents/ICCG_2015_Think_Tank_Award.pdf.

GGKP. (2013). Moving towards a common approach on green growth indicators—green growth knowledge platform scoping paper.

Grabisch, M., Nguyen, H.T., Walker, E.A. (1995). Fundamentals of uncertainty calculi with applications to fuzzy inference. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.CrossRef

Grabisch, M. (1996). The application of fuzzy integrals in multicriteria decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 89(3), 445–456.CrossRef

Grabisch, M. (1997). k-order additive discrete fuzzy measures and their representation. Fuzzy sets and systems, 92(2), 167–189.CrossRef

Grabisch, M., & Roubens, M. (2000). Application of the Choquet integral in multicriteria decision making. Fuzzy measures and integrals – theory and applications (pp. 348–374). Heidelberg: Physica Verlag.

Hertel, T. (1997). Global trade analysis: Modeling and applications, center for global trade analysis. Purdue University.

Horridge, M. (2008). SplitCom: Programs to disaggregate a GTAP sector. Centre of Policy Studies, Monash University, Melbourne.

IPCC. (2000). Special report on emissions scenario. In N. Nakicenovic, R Swart (Eds.) Cambridge University Press.

Ishii, K., & Sugeno, M. (1985). A model of human evaluation process using fuzzy measure. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 67, 19–38.CrossRef

Lee, H.L. (2008). The combustion-based CO2 emissions data for GTAP version 7 data base. West Lafayette: Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University.

Marichal, J.-L. (2000a). Behavioral analysis of aggregation in multicriteria decision aid. Preferences and Decisions under Incomplete Knowledge, 51, 153–178.CrossRef

Marichal, J.-L. (2000b). An axiomatic approach of the discrete Choquet integral as a tool to aggregate interacting criteria. The IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 8(6), 800–807.CrossRef

Marichal, J.-L. (2004). Tolerant or intolerant character of interacting criteria in ag-gregation by the Choquet integral. European Journal of Operational Research, 155, 771–791.CrossRef

Marichal, J.-L. (2007). K-intolerant capacities and Choquet integrals. European Journal of Operational Research, 177, 1453–1468.CrossRef

Marichal, J.-L., & Roubens, M. (2000). Determination of weights of interacting criteria from a reference set. European Journal of Operational Research, 124, 641–650.CrossRef

McDougall, R.,& Aguiar, A.H. (2008). Energy data. Global Trade, Assistance, and Production: The GTAP 7

Meyer, P., & Roubens, M. (2005). Choice, ranking and sorting in fuzzy multiple criteria decision aid. Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys (pp. 471–506). New York: Springer.CrossRef

Mori, T., & Murofushi, T. (1989). An analysis of evaluation model using fuzzy measure and the Choquet integral. In 5th fuzzy system symposium (pp. 207–212). Kobe (in Japanese).

Munda, G. (2004). Social multi-criteria evaluation (SMCE): Methodological foundations and operational consequences. European Journal of Operational Research, 158(3), 662–677.CrossRef

Murofushi, T. & Soneda, S. (1993). Techniques for reading fuzzy measures (III): interaction index. In 9th fuzzy system symposium (pp. 693–696). Sapporo, Japan.

Narayanan, B. G., Aguiar, A., & McDougall, R. (2012). Global trade, assistance, and production: The GTAP 8 data base. Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University.

OECD. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. http://www.oecd.org/std/42495745.pdf.

OECD. (2011). Health at a glance 2011: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/health_glance-2011-en.

OECD. (2012). Inclusive green growth. For the future we want. http://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/Rio+20%20brochure%20FINAL%20ENGLISH%20web%202.pdf.

Parrado, R., & De Cian, E. (2014). Technology spillovers embodied in international trade: Intertemporal, regional and sectoral effects in a global CGE framework. Energy Economics, 41(2014), 76–89.CrossRef

Parris, T. M., & Kates, R. W. (2003). Characterizing and measuring sustainable development. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 28(1), 559–586.CrossRef

Pearce, D. W., & Atkinson, G. D. (1993). Capital theory and measurement of sustainable development: An indicator of “weak” sustainability. Ecological Economics, 8(2), 103–108.CrossRef

Pinar, M., Cruciani, C., Giove, S., & Sostero, M. (2014). Constructing the FEEM sustainability index: A Choquet-integral application. Ecological Indicators, 39, 189–202.CrossRef

Pintér, P., Ardí, P., & Bartelmus, P. (2005). Indicators of sustainable development: Proposals for a way forward. Expert Group Meeting on Indicators of Sustainable Development, New York, 13–15 Dec 2005. http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2005/measure_indicators_sd_way_forward.pdf.

Ragwitz, M., Held, A., Resch, G., Faber, T., Haas, R., Huber, C. (2007). OPTRES. Assessment and optimisation of renewable energy support schemes in the european electricity market. Stuttgart: Fraunhofer IRB Verl.

Rose, S.K., & Lee, H.L. (2008). Non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions data for climate change economic analysis. GTAP Working Paper No. 43.

Saltelli, A., Jesinghaus, J., & Munda, G. (2007). Well being stories, beyond GDP conference. EU Parliament, Brussels, 19–20 Nov 2007.

Singh, R. K., Murty, H., Gupta, S., & Dikshit, A. (2009). An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecological Indicators, 9(2), 189–212.CrossRef

Solow, R. (1993). Sustainability: An economist’s perspective. In R. Dorfman & N. S. Dorfman (Eds.), Economics of the environment (pp. 179–187). New York: W. W. Norton.

Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2009). Report by the commission on the measurement of economic performance and social progress. http://www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/documents/rapport_anglais.pdf.

Thomas, H., Bozec, Y., Elkalay, K., De Baar, H. (2004). Enhanced open ocean storage of CO2 from shelf sea pumping. Science, 304, 1005–1008.CrossRef

Treisman, D. (2007). What have we learned about the causes of corruption from ten years of cross-national empirical research? Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 211–244.CrossRef

UN CSD—United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. (2012). Current ideas on sustainable development goals and indicators, Rio 2012 Issues Briefs n. 6. http://www.uncsd2012.org/index.php?page=view&type=400&nr=218&menu=45.

UN CSD—United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. (2012). Report of the united nations conference on sustainable development. http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/814UNCSD%20REPORT%20final%20revs.pdf.

UN DESA—United Nations Department on Economic and Social Affairs. (2007). Indicators of sustainable development: guidelines and methodologies, 3rd Ed. Oct 2007.

UN DESA—United Nations Department on Economic and Social Affairs. (2012). A guidebook to the green economy issue 1: Green economy, green growth, and low-carbon development—history, definitions and a guide to recent publications. http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/528Green%20Economy%20Guidebook_100912_FINAL.pdf.

UNDP—United Nations Development Programme. (1990). Human development report. http://www.undp.org.

UN OWG—United Nations Open Working Group. (2014). Open working group proposal for sustainable development goals. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1579SDGs%20Proposal.pdf.

Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. E. (1996). Our ecological footprint: Reducing human impact on the earth. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

World Bank. (2012). Inclusive green growth: The pathway to sustainable development. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTSDNET/Resources/Inclusive_Green_Growth_May_2012.pdf.

WCED—World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. published as annex to general assembly document A/42/427, development and international co-operation: Environment. Aug 2, 1987.

Yale and Columbia Universities. (2010). Environmental performance index—Summary for policymakers. http://epi.yale.edu/.

YCELP—Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (Yale University), Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN)/Columbia University and World Economic Forum, and Joint Research Centre (JRC)/European Commission. (2005). Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI). Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC). http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/data/set/esi-environmental-sustainability-index-2005.

EC—European Commission, EU SDS—European union sustainable development strategy. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/. Last access: Feb 2013.

FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Aquastat: http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/index.html?lang=en. Last access: Sept 2013.

FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, ResourceSTAT: http://faostat.fao.org/site/377/default.aspx#ancor. Last access: Sept 2013.

FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and IIASA—International Institute for Applied System Analysis, Global Agro-Ecological Zones. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/GAEZ/index.htm. Last access: Sept 2013

IEA—International Energy Agency, Country profiles. http://www.iea.org/countries/. Last access: July 2013.

IUCN—International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Red list of threatened species. http://www.iucnredlist.org/. Last access: Sept 2013

OECD—Organization for Economic and Cooperation Development, Main science and technology indicators. http://www.oecd.org/document/26/0,3343,en_2649_34451_1901082_1_1_1_1,00.html. Last access: July 2013.

REN 21—Renewable energy policy network for the 21st century. http://www.ren21.net/. Last access: July 2013.

United Nations Population Division, World population prospect—The 2010 revision, http://www.un.org/esa/population/. Last access: May 2013.

World Bank, WDI—World development indicators. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator. Last access: July 2013.

WHO—World Health Organization, Health financing: Health expenditure ratios. http://apps.who.int/ghodata/?vid=1901. Last access: Sept 2013.

WRI—World Resources Institute, CAIT—Climate analysis indicators tool, version 3.0: http://cait.wri.org. Last access: June 2013.

Title: The Ex-Ante Evaluation of Achieving Sustainable Development Goals
Authors: Lorenza Campagnolo
Carlo Carraro
Fabio Eboli
Luca Farnia
Ramiro Parrado
Roberta Pierfederici
Publication date: 24-02-2017
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Published in: Social Indicators Research / Issue 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0303-8300
Electronic ISSN: 1573-0921
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1572-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Estimation of Joint Income-Wealth Poverty: A Sensitivity Analysis

Estimation of the Percentage of Aid Received from the Food Bank Using a Stratified Sampling

One Size Fits All? The Validity of a Composite Poverty Index Across Urban and Rural Households in South Africa

Water Poverty in Africa: A Review and Synthesis of Issues, Potentials, and Policy Implications

Is Inequality a Latent Construct? An Assessment of Economic Inequality Indicators and Their Relation with Social Cohesion in Europe

Multidimensional Almost Dominance: Child Wellbeing in Egypt

Premium Partner