1. See Spangenberg (Chapter 7, this volume) for a detailed discussion of the institutional dimension of sustainable development and related indicator developments. See also Spangenberg et al. (2002) and Spangenberg (2002).
2. For indicators in use, see Rosenstrom and Palosaari (2000), UCR and MINAE (2002), and the list of indicator Web sites in the Annex.
3. A prominent example of indicators developed within this framework is the decoupling indicators, focusing on the links between the driving force and pressure component (Chapter 13, this volume). This can refer to pressures on the environment from material and energy flows and land requirements, as in the Geobiosphere Load Index (Chapter 14, this volume). Haberl et al. (Chapter 17, this volume) argue for pressure indicators for biodiversity loss and describe one example of a comprehensive pressure indicator to meet this need. For health, a modified framework of driving force, pressures, state, exposures, health effects, and actions (DPSEEA) has been applied (Chapter 15, this volume).
4. These scales are expanding with globalization. Jesinghaus (Chapter 5, this volume) discusses indicator approaches to measure various aspects and impacts (good or bad) of globalization.
5. Eisenmenger et al. (Chapter 12, this volume) discuss how global domestic extraction of raw materials can be related to specific scarcities such as global net primary production of biomass.
6. See Eisenmenger et al. (Chapter 12, this volume) for a detailed description of the approaches to make material flow analysis take into account transnational material flows and Moldan et al. (Chapter 14, this volume) for a similar introduction to energy flow analysis.
7. It is also closely associated with the evolution of the term natural capital (Victor 1991). Knippenberg et al. (Chapter 19, this volume) explore the concept of capital in discussions on sustainable development and show the normative implications of its use.
8. Zylicz (Chapter 6, this volume) discusses the value of greening GDP as a way to improve social welfare measures without having to assign relative weights to various aspects of well-being, which is often done in sustainable development indices.
9. Domestic extraction of raw materials (DE), when measured in DE per unit GDP at the global level, expresses the overall material intensity of the total human economy (Chapter 12, this volume).
10. The EEA database on Sustainability Targets and Reference Values contains definitions and links (star.eea.eu.int/default.asp).
11. Biggs et al. (Chapter 16, this volume) outline the baselines that have been proposed for biodiversity indicators by the Convention on Biodiversity.
12. Indeed, there are significant gaps in data collection for indicators in many OECD countries, such as for decoupling indicators (Chapter 13, this volume). For a discussion of the divide between the North and the South in scientific capacity in general and environmental knowledge production in particular, see Karlsson (2002).
13. See esl.jrc.it/envind/dashbrds.htm and Jesinghaus (Chapter 5, this volume) for information on the Dashboard of Sustainability. Bauler et al. (Chapter 3, this volume) discuss the methodological challenges of aggregation in more detail.
14. This difference has clear gender dimensions, for example in how society values reproductive and caring work (Chapter 7, this volume).
15. von Schirnding (Chapter 15, this volume) discusses environmental health indicators in more detail.
16. The full name is the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (www.unece.org/ env/pp).
17. Jesinghaus (Chapter 5, this volume) lists some democracy-related indicators in a cluster called "Culture and Governance."
Was this article helpful?