# Presentation: 167817

## Sustainable Development in the United States: An Experimental Set of Indicators

- September 2001 Final Report Prepared by the
- U.S. Interagency Working Group on Sustainable Development Indicators
- Washington, D.C.
- July 2002

## Overview

- 1. History
- 2. Report Table of Contents
- 3. Report Highlights
- 4. Experimental Indicators
- 5. Web Site
- 6. Current Activities
- 7. Contact Information

## 1. History

- Established in 1996 by Council on Environmental Quality/President’s Council on Sustainable Development.
- Interim Report, December 1998 (see next slide):
- Released after extensive OMB Review in May 1999.
- Print version (5,000 distributed- some copies still available).
- Web version (100s of requests and 10,000s of visits).
- Indicators Mavens Meeting, January 1999:
- Day long review meeting at the White House Conference Center where experts from state and city government, business and the NGO sectors reviewed the framework and listed the indicators in order of effectiveness.
- Final Report, September 2001 (see Sections 2-4):
- Web version only.
- Living document (print on demand).
- Web Site and Ongoing activities (see Sections 5 & 6).

## HistoryInterim Report, December 1998

- Foreword
- Acknowledgments
- Executive Summary
- Chapter 1. Introduction
- Chapter 2. Sustainable Development: A Working Definition and a Framework for Indicators
- Chapter 3.  Sustainability Issues and Criteria for Selecting Indicators
- Chapter 4. An Experimental Set of Sustainable Development Indicators
- List of Indicators
- Economic Indicators
- Environmental Indicators
- Social Indicators
- Chapter 5. What the Indicators Do and Do Not Tell Us about Sustainable Development
- Chapter 6.  Future Work on Sustainable Development Indicators
- Appendices
- A. Acronyms
- B. Inventory of Candidate Indicators
- C. Indicators Developed by the OECD, UNCSD, and the PCSD
- D. Outreach Efforts
- E. List of Regular Participants U.S. Interagency Working Group on Sustainable Development Indicators September 1997

## 2. Report Table of ContentsFinal Report, September 2001

- Foreword
- Acknowledgments
- Executive Summary
- Chapter 1. Concepts of Sustainability
- Chapter 2. Dashboard Presentation
- Chapter 3. List of Indicators
- Economic Indicators
- Environmental Indicators
- Social Indicators
- Chapter 4. Other Indicator Efforts
- Chapter 5. Indicators at the Community Level
- Chapter 6. Indicators for Management in Corporations and Government Agencies
- Chapter 7.  An Institutional Home for Reporting SDI for the US, A Stable Plan for Ongoing Work
- Appendices:
- Appendix I: Links to Related Internet Sites
- Appendix II: Notes on the Relationship Between SDI Development and Information for Managers
- Appendix III: Indicators for Environmental Sustainability
- List of Regular Participants U.S. Interagency Working Group on Sustainable Development Indicators December 2001

## 3. Report Highlights

- Foreword:
- Sustainable development is often defined as “development that meets the needs of the current generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs”.    In our previous report we called it “an evolving process that improves the economy, the environment and society for the benefit of both current and future generations”.  However, when considering the needs of our children, grandchildren and their children, we have come to realize that we do not and can not know their needs and wants, nor do we know the technological capacities and efficiencies that will be available to them.
- Making wise investments that can improve our own lives next year and those of our grandchildren requires resources and information on current conditions and trends.   Awareness of what opportunities are available and what problems can be averted are important inputs to any decision about choices that influence the future.    We hope the indicators and framework presented in this report make a contribution to this broadened awareness.

## 3. Report Highlights

- Acknowledgments:
- This report would have never been possible without the help and support of many individuals and organizations, both within and outside the Federal Government. We would like to extend a special thanks to the former White House Office of Environmental Quality and its staff, particularly Keith Laughlin for his encouragement, guidance, and support. We would also like to thank all of the Federal agencies that participated in the SDI Group and especially those that provided staff support that made this project possible. The SDI Group would like to thank those who have reviewed and provided comments on the work of the SDI Group. Their input will continue to be important in developing a set of indicators that is useful and meaningful to policy makers and the public.
- In Memoriam:
- We recall our friendship and collaboration with Nick Fedoruk, who died of cancer in October 2000. Nick donated his time to contribute to the SDI Group's efforts for several years. He contributed to the community indicators, institutional home and executive summary in this report. Thanks Nick.

## 3. Report Highlights

- Executive Summary:
- In 2001, the Administration began several initiatives in preparation for the World Summit on Sustainable Development scheduled for September 2002 in Johannesburg, South Africa.  Several agencies also launched with renewed vigor, efforts to measure the state of the environment or progress toward sustainable development.  Roundtables on measuring the sustainability of forest resources, rangelands, minerals and energy were active with Government and private sector participation.  A similar roundtable on water resources has been initiated.  With this backdrop, members of the Interagency Working Group on Sustainable Development Indicators (SDI Group) worked to revise and update their first report with the intention to make a contribution to these efforts.

## 3. Report Highlights

- Executive Summary:
- In this report, some indicators have been replaced and others were revised to use better data or to more closely fit the idea of sustainable development.  We asked in our first report, "How do we know we are making progress? And what measures are most useful in evaluating our progress"...toward sustainability?  We are working to provide better answers to those questions.
- Of the forty, fifteen show trends that result in favorable impacts, ten show trends that result in unfavorable impacts and fifteen indicators have trends that result in mixed or uncertain impacts (see next three slides).

## 3. Report Highlights

| Executive Summary: Table 1. Number of Indicators with Trends that Result in Favorable Impacts |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Economy | Environment | Social |
| Capital assets | Contaminants in biota | Access to Telecommunications |
| Labor productivity | Timber growth to removals balance | Educational attainment by level |
| Total materials per Unit of Investment and per PCE | Metropolitan air quality non-attainment | Life expectancy |
| Investment in R&D as a percentage of GDP |   | Educational achievement rates |
| Economy Management Index |   | Percentage children living in poverty |
| Consumption and government expenditures per capita |   |   |
| Home ownership |   |   |

## 3. Report Highlights

| Executive Summary: Table 2. Number of Indicators with Trends that Result in Unfavorable Impacts |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Economy | Environment | Social |
| Percentage of households with housing problems | Status of stratospheric ozone | People in census tracts with 40% poverty |
| Vehicle ownership, fuel use and travel per capita | Greenhouse climate response index | Citizen's participation |
|   | Greenhouse gas emissions | Access to health care |
|   | Waste inventory | Homelessness |

## 3. Report Highlights

| Executive Summary: Table 3. Number of Indicators with Trends that Result in Mixed or Uncertain Impacts |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Economy | Environment | Social |
| Percentage of renewable energy | Surface water quality | Population |
|   | Land use | Children living in families with at least one parent present |
|   | Ratio of renewable water supply to withdrawals | Crime rates |
|   | Fisheries utilization | Teacher training and applications of qualifications |
|   | Invasive alien species | Wealth distribution |
|   | Soil erosion rates | Contributing time and money to charities |
|   | Outdoor recreational activities |   |
|   | Biodiversity |   |

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- As we develop a set of indicators we may not be tracking some of the fashionable concerns of the moment.  It is more important to be able to compare trends over the years.  We need to increase integration and simplicity of the SDI set and at the same time increase its richness. This can be done by decreasing the number and increasing the power of the indicators that are reported.  At the same time, it would be possible to show the sub-elements of the aggregated indicators for those that wish to "drill down" into its data.

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- As we improve the indicator set, we need to better our understanding of indicators with sudden tipping points or non-linear qualities such as runaway inflation or apparent sudden failure of fishery resource.
- It will also be desirable to develop leading sustainable development indicators, the way there are leading economic indicators (such as trends in new home construction).
- As the SDI Group entered the process of indicator development, we recognized that it would be extremely difficult to develop a rigorous and satisfactory set of SDI.
- Many of the tasks to be done to improve the set of indicators will take a few years to complete. With a modest investment, but a high level of commitment to seeing the process through, it should be possible, if not easy.

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Capital Assets:
- Why is this indicator important?
- What does this indicator show?
- How does this indicator relate to sustainable development?
- Figure 3.1.  Net Fixed Reproducible Wealth
- Figure 3.2.  Investment as a Percentage of GDP

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Capital Assets:
- Why is this indicator important?
- Capital assets are one measure of the economic endowment that we pass on to the future. If a nation continues to invest sufficiently and successfully, its net tangible wealth increases.  Investment is important because it offsets the loss of capital caused by the use and aging of structures and equipment and because new investment often embodies new technologies that increase labor productivity and resource efficiency.

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Capital Assets:
- What does this indicator show?
- A common measure of capital assets is the net stock of fixed assets and consumer durable goods (formerly "fixed reproducible tangible wealth"). This measure comprises fixed private capital, fixed government capital, and consumer durables, such as automobiles and other goods with an expected service life of three years or more. It also includes equipment and structures (such as bridges, highways, and houses). This measure reflects annual investment and depreciation by the private sector and government, but it does not include human capital, such as direct investments in education and training.  Figure 3.1 shows that since 1988, the net stock of fixed assets and consumer durable goods doubled.

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Capital Assets:
- What does this indicator show?
- Labor and the stock of capital, primarily in the form of structures and equipment--combined with the unmeasured but essential stock of knowledge--are used to produce the current output of goods and services.
- Figure 3.2 shows the trend in investment as a percent of GDP.  It reflects the portion of the total output of our economic system that is devoted to building new productive capacity.

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Capital Assets:
- How does this indicator relate to sustainable development?
- The upward trend in capital assets is one indicator of our progress in creating a solid economic foundation for future generations.  Investment is relevant to sustainability because it is the economic process through which our economic endowment is increased.
- The trend shows several notable features.  One is the reduction of the sensitivity of investment to business cycles.  Post war management of the economic system has so far avoided the sort of major declines in investment as a percent of GDP that occurred in the Great Depression and the mid-1940s.  Second, there has been a gradual increase in investment as a percent of GDP since 1960.  This is a positive trend for sustainability, so long as environmental and social endowments are not decreased by the investments being made.

## 4. Experimental IndicatorsCapital Assets: Figure 3.1.  Net Fixed Reproducible Wealth

**Source:  Fixed Assets and Consumer Durable Goods by Sherby W. Herman, from the April 2000 Survey of Current Business.  Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce.**

## 4. Experimental IndicatorsCapital Assets: Figure 3.2.  Investment as a Percentage of GDP

**Source:  Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce.**

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Status of Stratospheric Ozone:
- Why is this indicator important?
- What does this indicator show?
- How does this indicator relate to sustainable development?
- Figure 3.23.  Stratospheric Ozone Reduction in the U.S. Since 1979
- Figure 3.24.  South Pole Ozone Hole

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Status of Stratospheric Ozone:
- Why is this indicator important?
- The stratospheric ozone layer shields the Earth from harmful ultraviolet (UV)-B radiation. Reduced stratospheric ozone allows more UV-B radiation to reach the earth, and this is harmful to many species and is related to an increased incidence of skin cancer in humans.

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Status of Stratospheric Ozone:
- What does this indicator show?
- Human activities that result in the emission of gases that contain chlorine and bromine have resulted in the depletion of stratospheric ozone. Figure 3.23 shows that the average monthly total column ozone over the United States has declined by about 7% since 1979 (based on measurements at Fresno, California; Boulder, Colorado; Nashville, Tennessee; and Wallops Island, Virginia). The largest ozone depletions related to chlorine and bromine emissions have been observed in Antarctica during the austral spring. Figure 3.25 shows that more than 50% of the springtime ozone at the South Pole has been lost compared to pre-1970 values.
- Regulations on the emission of certain ozone-depleting gases became effective on January 1, 1996. NOAA measurements indicate that the total ozone depleting potential of these gases reached a peak at the surface in 1994, presumably due to steps taken in anticipation of the regulations. Based on this data, the concentrations of these ozone-depleting gases in the stratosphere are expected to peak by the turn of the century.

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Status of Stratospheric Ozone:
- How does this indicator relate to sustainable development?
- Loss of the stratospheric ozone layer would likely lead to wide-spread impacts on ecology, agriculture, and human health and thus is incompatible with sustainable development.
- Reference:
- NOAA Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics Laboratory (CMDL), Summary Review (Bi-Annual); NOAA Climate Prediction Center, Northern Hemisphere Winter Summary.

## 4. Experimental IndicatorsStatus of Stratospheric Ozone: Figure 3.23.Stratospheric Ozone Reduction in the U.S. Since 1979

**Source:  Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.**

## 4. Experimental IndicatorsStatus of Stratospheric Ozone: Figure 3.24. South Pole Ozone Hole

**Source:  Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.**

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Access to the Internet:
- Why is this indicator important?
- What does this indicator show?
- How does this indicator relate to sustainable development?
- Figure 3.47:  Percent of U.S. Households with a Computers and Internet Access

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Access to the Internet:
- Why is this indicator important?
- The internet is becoming an increasingly vital tool in our society. It offers an efficient, low-cost and democratic means of distributing and sharing diverse information and ideas around the world. Americans in increasing numbers are using the internet to conduct such day-to-day activities as business, correspondence, research and information-gathering, desktop publishing, democratic deliberation and political activism. Thus, each year, being digitally connected becomes ever more critical to educational, social, democratic and economic advancement.  The vast information available on the internet can be seen as a new part of our social endowment.  People who lack access to those tools are at a growing disadvantage. An essential component of sustainability is equitable access to resources and this inevitably includes access to information.

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Access to the Internet:
- What does this indicator show?
- The rapid growth of the internet occurring among most Americans, regardless of income, education, race or ethnicity, location, age, or gender, suggests that digital inclusion is a realizable goal.  For example, the share of households with internet access soared by 58%, rising from 26.2% in December 1998 to 41.5% in August 2000.  The share of Americans using the Internet rose from 32.7% in December 1998 to 44.4% in August 2000.
- While the "Digital Divide" (the concept that society is separated into the information rich and the information poor.) is still quite wide (and in a few cases expanding further), groups that have traditionally been digital "have-nots" are now making gains.

## 4. Experimental Indicators

- Access to the Internet:
- How does this indicator relate to sustainable development?
- The internet is a powerful global medium of free expression as it facilitates transboundary information and opinion sharing which are fundamental to the democratic process.  How it will continue to influence the broader trends in society has yet to be seen, however we do know that it is also an important resource in our efforts to create sustainability in an information-based democratic society.
**Reference:**
- Falling Through the Net:  Toward Digital Inclusion, a Report on Access to Technology Tools, October, 2000.  http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fttn00/contents00.html, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

## 4. Experimental IndicatorsAccess to the Internet: Figure 3.47: Percent ofU.S. Households with a Computers and Internet Access

**Source:  National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.**

## 5. Web Sitehttp://www.sdi.gov/

- 5.1 Home Page
- 5.2 Feedback
- 5.3 Reports and Databases
- 5.4 Links to Related Sites
- 5.5 Web Server Technology

## 5.1 Home Page

## 5.2 Feedback

## 5.3 Reports and Databases

## 5.3 Reports and Databases

## 5.4 Links to Related Sites

## 5.5 Web Server Technology

## 5.5 Web Server Technology

## 5.5 Web Server Technology

- Technology:
- Dell PowerEdge 2400 Web Server (high-end).
- Microsoft Windows 2000 Server (dual processor).
- Microsoft Office 2000 Premium (Excel, PhotoDraw, FrontPage and other standard Web authoring tools).
- State-of-the-art statistical analysis tools (Insightful S-PLUS and Graphlets).
- State-of-the-art XML Web Services authoring tools for electronic publishing and archiving on CD/DVD (NextPage’s NXT 3 and Folio Views).

## 5.5 Web Server Technology

- Resources:
- Key Sustainable Development and Industrial Ecology reports.
- Digital Library of the State of the Environment
- Started at EPA: 1991-1994
- Continued at DOI: 1994-1997
- Continued at EPA: 1997-present
- Environmental Node on the FedGov Content Network (FedStats.Net, XML.Gov, and e-Gov).
- Archive of Reports, Metadata. and Statistical Databases.

## 6. Current Activities

- Dashboard of Indicators and Drill-down to Local Indicators:
- Secretariat Staff
- CEQ & World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD):
- Ted Heinz and David Berry
- Sustainability Water Resources Roundtable (SWRR):
- Tim Smith
- http://water.usgs.gov/wicp/acwi/swrr
- Support for EPA State of the Environmental Report and Environmental Indicator Initiative:
- Coordination:
- Ted Heinz and David Berry
- Metadata for indicators:
- Brand Niemann
- Re-design of Community Indicators Web Site:
- Tim Stuart and Grecia Matos

## 7. Contact Information

- David Berry, Executive Director, IWGSDI
- David_Berry@ios.doi.gov
- 202-208-4839
- Ted Heintz, Associate Director, Office of Policy, US Department of the Interior (IWGSDI Host)
- Theodore_Heintz@ios.doi.gov
- 202-208-4939
- Grecia Matos, Report Author and Editor, IWGSDI
- Grecia_Matos@ios.doi.gov
- 202-208-4923
- Brand Niemann, Webmaster, IWGSDI
- bniemann@cox.net
- 202-566-1657