1

Kazi F. Jalal

Faculty, Harvard Extension School

Lecture 6.0910/06/09

Environment and Social Development Indicators

2

Lecture Outline 1. Introduction

2. Environmental quality indices

-Cost of remediation

-Environmental elasticity

- Environmental diamond

3. Social Development elasticity

3. Human development index (HDI)

4. Summary & conclusions

3

4

In my policy-making I need an indicator in money terms for losses in environment and resources, as a counterweight to the indicator for production, namely national income. If a theoretically sound indicator is not possible, then think up one that is rather less theoretically sound.

A Former Indonesian Minister for Population and Environment, 1986

A concerted effort to enhance habitability of our planet is unlikely to succeed unless we know “where we are” and “where we want to go.” To answer these questions, we must first consider exactly what we include in the term “environment.” If we restrict our definition to overly simplified definitions, such as the amount of a specified pollutant in the air, we have very little difficulty in measuring the environment. However, as we broaden our definition to include all the physical components, or all the physical and biological, or all the physical, biological and cultural ones, environment becomes exponentially more difficult to describe.

W.A. Thomas, 1972

5

Environmental quality indicesEnvironmental quality indices

Cost of Remediation Environmental Elasticity Environmental Diamond

7

Cost of Remediation (COR)Cost of Remediation (COR)

8

Definition and ConceptDefinition and Concept

COR is the cost of moving the present state of environment to a more acceptable level based on a set of pre-determined standards

Three steps... Assess existing environmental quality Establish a set of environmental standards or

targets Estimate aggregated costs of achieving

environmental standards or targets

9

Advantages of CORAdvantages of COR

It is in monetary terms and can be an effective counterweight to traditional economic indicators such as GDP

Costs of remediation of different components of the environment can be added, subtracted freely and, thus, it partially avoids the weighting problem

10

TargetsTargets

Air and Water

Pollutants: Five pollutants including COD, suspended solids and heavy metals (water); total suspended particulates (TSP) and sulfur (air)

Targets: 90% reduction in water and air pollutant emissions (1990 levels) in 10 years

11

TargetsTargets

Land: Three Components Soil Erosion Control

– Target: 70% of eroded area will be controlled to achieve 70-95% erosion reduction within 10 years,

Forest cover– Target: 20% of total land cover within 10 years,

Municipal Solid Waste Management – Target: All municipal wastes will be collected and

disposed immediately

12

TargetsTargets

Ecosystem/Biodiversity Conservation

Target: Protected areas as a % of total land area,10%

10-year plan of building national parks and conservation areas (Indonesia, e.g.)

13

PRC cost data on air, water and land (soil erosion control and reforestation) pollution control are used and extrapolated to other countries.

WB’s cost estimates on solid waste management in developing countries and IUCN’s cost data for Indonesia on ecosystem management (of parks and conservation areas) are used and extrapolated to other countries.

Cost AssumptionsCost Assumptions

14

Table 1. Table 1. Annualized Cost of Remediation for DMCs ($million in 1990 US$)Annualized Cost of Remediation for DMCs ($million in 1990 US$)

Country Water Air Land Ecosystem COR(total)BAN 13.70 30.34 321.47 52.39 417.89

BHU 0.16 0.35 8.50 24.45 33.45

CAM 0.31 0.70 78.11 30.85 109.97

LAO 0.26 0.58 38.46 33.18 72.48

MON 5.91 13.08 2,773.26 13.39 2,805.64

MYA 3.56 7.87 260.74 65.20 337.36

NEP 0.78 1.74 115.60 48.90 167.02

PAK 53.97 119.49 867.20 36.09 1,076.76

SRI 3.50 7.76 65.12 147.86 224.24

VIE 12.97 28.71 200.75 251.48 493.91

PRC 1,430.13 3,166.07 12,657.97 299.79 17,553.96

IND 418.97 927.53 4,882.97 852.23 7,081.70

INO 100.10 221.61 953.92 296.30 1,571.93

PNG 1.73 3.82 12.94 70.44 88.92

PHI 39.59 87.65 319.67 160.67 607.57

THA 67.00 148.32 557.63 47.73 820.68

FIJ 0.52 1.16 7.48 20.37 29.53

KOR 199.84 442.41 203.24 61.71 907.19

MAL 43.15 95.52 138.78 329.48 606.93

SIN 24.42 54.07 14.65 14.55 107.70

TOTAL 2,420.58 5,358.76 24,478.44 2,857.06 35,114.83

Table 1Table 1

15

Figure 1Figure 1

Figure 2Figure 2

17

Environmental Elasticity (EE)Environmental Elasticity (EE)

18

Definition and ConceptDefinition and Concept

EE is a ratio : aggregate percent change in environment /

aggregate percent change in economy

Principal merits: dynamic; uses data for two points in time to

capture environmental changes w.r.t economic trends

it is a trend indicator as opposed to a state indicator

19

Figure 3Figure 3

(0,1)

II I

Economic Aggregates

(Denominator)

(1,0)

IV

(-1,0)

III

(0,-1)

Positive Environmental change

relative to

Positive Economic change

Negative Environmental change

relative to

Positive Economic change

Negative Environmental change

relative to

Negative Economic change

Environmental Aggregates (Numerator)

Positive Environmental change

relative to

Negative Economic change

Fig. 3: Map of Environmental Elasticity

20

Table 2Table 2 Table 3 Average Annual Change Rates (AACR) of Selected Environmental-Economic Indicators

Country Tot. Com. Eng. Use % Pop w S.D.W. Fertilizer Use/ha Forest Cover Env. Aggregate Total GDP

AACR (1980-93) AACR (1980-91) AACR (1980-93) AACR (1980-90) AACR (1980-early 90) AACR (1980-93)

Viet Nam 2.6% 2.91% 36.21% -1.44% -9.34% 7.10%

Nepal 8.1% 15.90% 23.31% -1.07% -4.15% 5.00%

Bangladesh 7.9% 9.45% 9.75% -2.73% -2.73% 4.20%

Lao PDR 2.6% 2.92% -2.12% -0.90% 0.39% 4.80%

India 6.7% 7.31% 2.13% -0.62% -0.53% 5.20%

Mongolia 2.2% -3.09% 4.35% -0.86% -2.62% 3.80%

Pakistan 6.8% 3.77% 6.98% -2.69% -3.18% 6.00%

P.R. China 5.1% 5.45% 7.75% -0.65% -2.01% 9.60%

Sri Lanka 1.9% 10.16% 0.72% -1.50% 1.51% 4.00%

Myanmar -0.8% 5.45% -2.38% -1.22% 1.85% 0.80%

Indonesia 7.5% 7.51% 7.01% -1.00% -2.00% 5.80%

Philippines 3.5% 7.08% 3.15% -2.91% -0.62% 1.40%

P. New Guinea 2.4% 9.84% 8.32% -0.30% -0.29% 3.10%

Thailand 10.5% 1.25% 20.21% -2.91% -8.09% 8.20%

Korea, Rep. 9.5% 0.25% 2.10% -0.15% -2.87% 9.10%

Singapore 7.7% 0.00% 0.14% 0.00% -1.96% 6.90%

AVERAGE 5.3% 5.38% 7.98% -1.40% -2.31% 5.17%

21

Table 3Table 3Table 4. Environmental Elasticity (1980) -early 1990s)

+ Env

+ Env

+ Eco

+ Eco

+ Env

+ Env

+ Eco

+ Eco

+ Env

DiagramRankingValueCountry

Myanmar 2.32 1

Sri Lanka 0.38 2

Lao PDR 0.08 3

P. New Guinea -0.09 4

India -0.10 5

+ Eco

Group Characteristics

A

A

A

B

B

22

+ Env

+ Env

+ Eco

+ Eco

+ Env

+ Env

+ Eco

+ Eco

+ Env

DiagramRankingValueCountry

Bangladesh -0.65 12

-0.69 13

Nepal -0.83 14

Thailand -0.99 15

Viet Nam -1.32 16

+ Eco

Group Characteristics

B

B

B

B

C

Mongolia

23

Environmental Diamond (ED)Environmental Diamond (ED)

Definitions and ConceptsDefinitions and Concepts

A graphic tool based on WB’s Development Diamond (DD)

DD: GDP per capita, life expectancy, gross primary school enrollment, access to safe drinking water

ADB Environmental Diamond (ED) ED: air, water, land, ecosystem

25

100%Access to safedrinkingwater

100%100%

100%

GDP per capita

Life expectancy

Primary schoolenrollment

100%

Ecosystem100%

100%

100%

Air

Water

Land

Global Average Reg’l AverageHypothetical Country Hypothetical Country

Development Diamond Environmental Diamond

26

Table 4Table 4 Selected Environmental Indicators for Environmental Diamonds

Country Energy Consumption % Pop w Safe Fertilizer Use Forest Cover (%)

kg/c (oil eq), 1993 Drinking water,1991 100g/ha,1993 1990

Viet Nam 77 50% 1347 25.0%

Nepal 22 37% 391 35.5%

Bangladesh 59 78% 1032 5.6%

Lao PDR 39 28% 42 55.7%

India 242 75% 420 15.7%

Mongolia 1089 66% 108 8.9%

Pakistan 209 50% 1015 2.4%

P.R. China 623 71% 3005 13.0%

Sri Lanka 110 60% 964 25.8%

Myanmar 39 33% 69 42.7%

Indonesia 321 42% 1147 57.5%

Philippines 328 81% 540 26.0%

Papua New Guinea 238 33% 308 77.8%

Thailand 678 72% 544 24.8%

Korea, Rep. 2863 78% 4656 65.7%

Singapore 5563 100% 5600 0.0%

AVERAGE 441 69% 1217 21%

27

Table 5Table 5 Scores for Constructing Environmental Diamonds

Country Air Water Land Ecosystem

(Energy Use/c) (% Pop w/o S.D.W) (Fertilizer Use/ha) (% Land w/o Forest)

Viet Nam 17% 159% 111% 95%

Nepal 5% 200% 32% 82%

Bangladesh 13% 70% 85% 120%

Lao PDR 9% 229% 3% 56%

India 54% 79% 35% 107%

Mongolia 245% 108% 9% 115%

Pakistan 47% 159% 83% 124%

P.R. China 140% 92% 247% 110%

Sri Lanka 25% 127% 79% 94%

Myanmar 9% 213% 6% 73%

Indonesia 72% 184% 94% 54%

Philippines 74% 60% 44% 94%

Papua New Guinea 54% 213% 25% 28%

Thailand 153% 89% 45% 95%

Korea, Rep. 645% 70% 383% 43%

Singapore 1253% 0% 460% 127%

AVERAGE 100% 100% 100% 100%

29

Table 6Table 6 Country Rankings Based on RMS Values

Rank Country RMS Total (eq. wt) (%) Group Characteristics

1 Philippines 70 A

2 India 74 A

3 Bangladesh 81 A

4 Sri Lanka 89 A

5 Thailand 103 B

6 Viet Nam 108 B

7 Nepal 109 B

8 Papua New Guinea 111 B

9 Pakistan 111 B

10 Myanmar 113 B

11 Indonesia 113 B

12 Lao PDR 118 B

13 Mongolia 146 B

14 PRC 159 B

First is the best. A = less than average; B = more than average.

30

II: SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS

31

Social Development Elasticity (SDE)

SDE is a ratio : percent change in ratios of income distribution /

aggregate percent change in economy

Principal merits: dynamic; uses data for two points in time to

capture social changes w.r.t economic trends it is a trend indicator as opposed to a state

indicator

32

33

34

Social Development Elasticity(SDE)

Cntry Year Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 GDP %C GDP

Q5/

Q1

%C Q5/Q1

SDE

PRC 1989 6.46% 11.58% 15.87% 24.06% 42.03% 15128.07

6.51-10.15 1.26

1990 7.01% 11.89% 16.14% 23.98% 40.98% 163414.99

5.85-4.22 0.28

1991 6.44% 11.40% 14.85% 31.25% 36.06% 187921.71

5.6023.56 -1.09

1992 6.02% 10.70% 15.81% 25.82% 41.65% 2287 6.92

IND 1989 9.10% 12.90% 16.60% 21.70% 39.70% 494413.03

4.36-1.51 0.12

1990 9.10% 13.10% 16.90% 21.80% 39.10% 558814.82

4.308.35 -0.56

1991 9.00% 12.50% 15.90% 20.70% 41.90% 641612.87

4.660.32 -0.02

1992 8.80% 12.50% 16.20% 21.40% 41.10% 7242 4.67

35

Social Development Elasticity (SDE)SDE

SDESDE

SDE

SDE

36

a) Human Development Index(HDI) Summary measure of three basic dimensions of

human development: a. Longevity as measured by life expectancy at

birth b. Education as measured by adult literacy

rate(2/3) and combined primary,secondary & tertiary gross enrollment ratio(1/3)

c. Standard of living (gdp/capita in US$)

Measuring HDI a.Fix goalposts for max and min value for each b.Calculate three indices (life expectancy,

education and GDP) and add them.

37

Goalposts for calculating HDI**UNDP(2005): Human Development Report

Indicator Maxm. value Minm. Value

Life expectancy at birth

85 25

Adult literacy rate (%) 100 0

Combined gross enrollment ratio(%)

100 0

GDP per capita (PPP US$)

40,000 100

38

HDI Calculation______________

HDI= D1+D2+D3Where: D1=longevity index; D2= Knowledge index and

D3= standard of living index. Individual indices are calculated as:

D= (actual value-min. value) /( max value-min.value)

39

Calculating HDI

1.Calculating life expectancy index (D1)

D1 =(actual value-min. value)/(max. value-min value);

2.Calculating knowledge index (D2)

D2= 2/3 adult literacy index+ 1/3 gross enrollment index

3. Calculating GDP index (D3)

D3 = (log actual value –log min. value)/ (log max. value – log. Min. value)

4. HDI = 1/3 (D1+D2+D3)

40

Most and least livable countries

-High HDI(>0.8)

Iceland (0.968),Norway,Canada,Australia, Ireland

- Low HDI(<0.5)

Chad(0.389), Ethiopia, Mali, Guinea, Uganda

41

Summary & Conclusions

Indicators of SD are many; like an automobile dashboard they serve many purposes.

COR indicate the amount of wealth a society has to forgo to realize environmental goals

EE expresses dynamic relationship between GDP growth and environmental degradation

ED reveals the state of the environment at a given point of time

SDE expresses dynamic relationship between GDP growth & income gap between the rich & the poor

HDI determines human well-being by measuring their level of income, education & longevity