Knowledge Management produced by

Anne Louette

Sustainability Indicators of Nations

A Contribution to Dialogue
Knowledge Management
Sustainability Indicators of Nations

PRODUCED BY REVISION COLABORADOR BRASILEIRO

Anne Louette Assertiva Produções Editoriais

contato@compendiosustentabilidade.com.br
GRAPHICS AND ART EDITING
Team: Report Comunicação
RESEARCH AND FUND-RAISING
Report Design www.reportcomunicacao.com.br
Anne Louette PUBLISHER
Silvia Laudisio Antakarana Cultura Arte Ciência
EDITING AND TEXTS Ltda. / Willis Harman House
Fernando Felício Pachi Filho
PRINT RUN
Prix Consultoria em Comunicação e
Gestão de Prêmios 8.000 copies 1st Edition
ENGLISH TRANSLATION São Paulo, SP
André Alonso Marinho Machado 2009

Warning
This guide, Sustainability Indicators of Nations provides information from various public sources. All references appropriate
to the source(s) of information were made, and permission to data disclosure was sought during the development phase.
This survey aimed to keep the integrity of information and respect the way the contents are presented by their creators, so as
to provide the reader with an accurate picture of how these indicators have been conceived and what they are used for. The
proximity to the actual events and accuracy of the information must be credited to the source they have been taken from.
In the event the authorship of any piece of information has been incorrectly attributed or can be enhanced with useful data
and comments, we would be glad to be contacted about it. Reproduction of the contents is permitted provided the source of
the text reproduced is mentioned. Thank you.

www.compendiosustentabilidade.com.br
The online “Sustainability Compendium” makes the content of this publication available on the Internet in an
organized and periodically revised manner, allowing for the management indicators to be always updated with the
most relevant social and environmental responsibility issues in the country and in the world. The online “Sustainability
Compendium” is, therefore, part of a collective effort of managers and mentors of CSR management indicators to
broaden their use in Brazil and abroad. Its ultimate purpose is sustainable development and that Corporate Social
Responsibility practices become embedded in all levels of first, second and third sector organizations.

Dados Internacionais de Catalogação na Publicação (CIP)

(Câmara Brasileira do Livro, SP, Brasil)

Indicadores de Nações: uma Contribuição ao Diálogo da Sustentabilidade:

Gestão do Conhecimento / organização, pesquisa, textos e captação de recursos Anne Louette. - 1.ed.
São Paulo: WHH – Willis Harman House, 2007. Vários Colaboradores

Bibliografia
ISBN 978-85-88262-16-4

1. Desenvolvimento sustentável 2. Indicadores políticos 3. Indicadores sociais

4. Responsabilidade ambiental 5. Responsabilidade social I. Louette, Anne

07 - 8003 CDD - 300.216

Índices para catágolo sistemático:

1. Indicadores de Sustentabilidade de Nações:

Ciências Sociais 300.216
Executive Summary
In 2007, following one year of research, the first work of the trilogy was launched: Knowledge Management – Sustainability Compendium: Social
and Environmental Responsibility Management Tools. It gathers CSR management tools from 33 countries in the Americas and Europe seeking
to enhance the integration of these tools into the daily management systems of small, medium-sized and large organizations of the three sectors
(public sector, private sector, and non-governmental organizations).
It also aims to show the broad range of tools available, which serve as a parameter to figure out what is going on around the world regarding sus-
tainability. It is a continuous learning and evolution process towards the planet’s sustainability.
With 14 thousand copies, the publication was sponsored by Petrobras, Comgas and AES Tietê (1st edition); Anglo American (2nd edition); Pe-
trobras and SESI (3rd edition). It was launched in Europe in October 2007 at the Social and Environmental World Forum and the national launch
occurred in late 2007, in the States of São Paulo, Minas Gerais and Rio de Janeiro. In 2008, there was regional publicity in several Brazilian states
– Espírito Santo, Pernambuco, Paraíba, Ceará, the Federal District, Goiás, Paraná and Amazonas – aimed at broadening its distribution.
Without intending to standardize procedures, the publication fosters deep reflection on the management tools available to ensure sustainability
planning and evolution. With this in mind, its content is accessible on the Internet at www.compendiosustentabilidade.com.br. The online Sus-
tainability Compendium can be continuously updated, besides allowing organizations to submit new data, share doubts, solutions and successful
experiences, as well as suggest changes.

This publication, Knowledge Management – Sustainability Compendium: Sustainability Indicators of Nations, is the second work of the trilogy, pre-
senting over 25 Sustainability Indicators of nations being applied, both in Brazil and abroad, ‘to try and pull down the old and unsustainable economy,
supported by the tragic fallacy of the GDP metrics.’

The idea is to define sustainable development patterns that take into account environmental, economic, social, ethical and cultural aspects. Hence the
need to define indicators to measure, monitor and assess such sustainable patterns, and thus guide us in our path.

While volume I is aimed specifically at managers, this publication, Knowledge Management – Sustainability Compendium: Sustainability Indi-
cators of Nations, aims to help our governments. It is everyone’s challenge, that is, the planet’s interdependency exempts no one from discussing,
facing the tasks and sharing the results.

The same way volume I raises the need for management tools to be used as a guide in the construction of our management activities to achieve the
planet’s sustainability, this publication raises the need to develop, and demand from our governments, indicators that can assess sustainability so
they can ‘serve as a sound basis for decision-making in all levels and contribute to a self-regulated sustainability of the environment and development
integrated systems’ (UN 1992)

After all, if we want to be sustainable, and demand these results from our governments, we must know how to measure sustainability. If we want to
guide the economy towards sustainable development and common well-being (decreasing poverty, promoting justice and dignity to all), rationally
channeling our production efforts to sustainable results, we must create assessment tools for these results. This is the only way to build a basis for
political decisions and development of strategies aligned with the current state of the world – of scarcity and unsustainability.

Dialogue based on ethics in order to unite three forces – the so-called first sector, or public power; the second sector, formed by the private sector,
and the third sector, represented by non-governmental organizations – will be indispensable to reach consensus about possible solutions: the ackno-
wledgement of public policy and its indicators as a means to universalize collective interests and the integration of theory and practice of economic
agents and our governments.

Not intending to present a magic, unique and uniform formula, the content invites readers to acquire knowledge that is likely to result in new ideas and
constant benefits to all involved. At the same time, methodological descriptions of the sustainability indicators of nations are not exhaustive, because
research methods are not always sufficiently defined, and the same applies to their variables, main factors, techniques and procedures.

This publication seeks to inform and promote dialogue. It deals with the dynamic transformation of the society’s own awareness. By disseminating
these concepts, we seek to offer food for thought..

Finally, volume III, to be launched in 2010, will address protagonism as a means to push forward ‘a strong civil society that allows people, even the
most vulnerable ones, to influence and monitor public policy of all levels and demand moral and financial accountability from governments for their
promises to reduce poverty and social exclusion.’
The civil society can and must donate its time, talent, experience and enthusiasm. The civil society can become organized in cooperatives, non-
governmental organizations, academic institutions and women, youth or traditional groups associations. Nevertheless, engagement is not restric-
ted to formal organizations. Countless people are involved in voluntary actions that make a difference, creating broad social networks. Many civil
society organizations have shown mobilization skills and have created demands that keep our leaders committed to a better world.

Enjoy your reading and roll up your sleeves.

1
INTRO
Reference to inspiring people
Hazel Henderson – Founder of Ethical Markets Media,
LLC, Hazel Henderson is the creator and co-executive
producer of its TV series. She is a world-renowned futurist,
evolutionary economist, a worldwide syndicated columnist,
consultant on sustainable development, and author of The
Axiom and Nautilus award-winning book Ethical Markets:
Growing the Green Economy (2006) and eight other books.
She co-edited, with Harlan Cleveland and Inge Kaul, The
UN: Policy and Financing Alternatives, Elsevier Scientific,
UK 1995 (US edition, 1996). www.hazelhenderson.com
Jean Gadrey – French economist, Emeritus Professor
of Economics at the University of Lille. Critic of both the
neoclassical economic theory prevailing in economic
sciences and the ‘neoliberalism’, he has worked in the last
years on wealth indicators and the limits of economic growth.
Member of the Scientific Council at Attac (Association for
the tax on the financial affairs and the assistance with the
citizens – an alter-globalization (also referred to as the global
justice movement) organization. Besides scientific papers
and books, he has also authored several essays in magazines,
such as Alternatives Économiques, and newspapers, such as
Le Monde and Politis.
José Eli da Veiga – Full professor at the School of
Economics, Business Administration and Accountancy /
University of São Paulo (FEA-USP), where he coordinates
the Center for Social and Environmental Economics (NESA).
Besides collaborating with scientific papers in Brazilian
and international journals and several chapters in books,
he has authored 13 books, among which: A Emergência
Socioambiental (The Social and Environmental Emergence)
(S.Paulo: Ed. Senac, 2007) Meio Ambiente & Desenvolvimento
(Environment & Development) (S.Paulo: Ed. Senac, 2006)
– O desafio do século XXI e Desenvolvimento Sustentável
(Sustainable Development – The challenge of the 21st
Century) (R.Janeiro: Ed. Garamond, 2005). He also writes
editorials at newspaper Valor Econômico. www.zeeli.pro.br
Ladislau Dowbor – Ph. D. in Economic Sciences from
the Central School of Planning and Statistics of Warsaw,
full professor at Catholic University of São Paulo-PUC,
and consultant for several UN agencies. He has authored
‘Democracia Econômica’ (Economic Democracy),
‘A Reprodução Social: propostas para uma gestão
descentralizada’ (Social Reproduction: proposals for a
decentralized management), ‘O Mosaico Partido: a economia
além das equações’ (The Broken Mosaic: For an Economics
Beyond Equations), ‘Tecnologias do Conhecimento: os
Desafios da Educação’ (Knowledge Technologies: the
challenges of Education), all of them published by Editora
Vozes, ‘O que Acontece com o Trabalho?’ (What happens to
work?) (Ed. Senac), besides having co-organized the work
‘Economia Social no Brasil’ (Social Economics of Brazil) (Ed.
Senac). www.dowbor.org
Lala Deheinzelin – Lala Deheinzelin is a consultant,
lecturer and cultural entrepreneur, with a transdisciplinary
2
profile, whose job is aimed at fostering a desirable future.
Following a career as an artist, and a period of consultancy
at corporations, she has been working on (1) arts and artistic
languages to better convey contents and carry out strategies
(2) as an advisor focused on Creative Economy and Sustainable
Development, working for local governments and multilateral
bodies in international cooperation. She has founded her own
organization Enthusiasmo Cultural (www.enthusiasmo.com.
br). Assistant to the UN South-South Cooperation Special
Unit’s Creative Economy for Development Programme (http://
ssc.undp.org); Director of the International Cooperation for
the Instituto Pensarte (www.pensarte.org.br); founder of NEF
– Núcleo de Estudos do Futuro (www.nef.org.br)
Patrick Viveret – Philosopher, adviser at the audit court
and author of the mission ‘New Wealth Factors’, currently
under the French government Interministerial Committee
for Innovation and Solidary Economy. He directs the
International Center Pierre Mendès France and collaborates
with the Transversales Science-Culture magazine.
“Let’s stop being deluded by the deadly logic of war, whether
religious or economic. Let’s stop thinking about our
contemporary issues based on the 19th Century’s geopolitics
or economics, both built upon fierce and obsessive
competition. Let’s spend most of our energy creating new
ways of planetary citizenship, which will provide the human
adventure with an opportunity to not only ensure our
biological survival but also reach a higher quality level of
awareness – because things can get even worse.”
Rosa Alegria – Futurist, trends researcher, with a degree
in Languages from the University of São Paulo – USP,
Master’s degree in Future Studies from the University of
Houston, vice-president of the Future Studies Center (NEF)
at PUCSP, and Millennium Project’s Brazilian Node Co-
chair at the WFUNA – World Federation of United Nations
Associations.
Serge Latouche – Works on various groups on the
creation of the post development concept. He is also a
historical contributor to the magazine La Revue du M.A.U.S.S.
and professor emeritus at the Jean Monnet Faculty of Law,
Economics and Management at the University of Paris and
at the Institut D’études du Développement Économique et
Social (IEDS) in Paris. He is also the director of research for
the Group in Anthropology, Epistemology, and Economy of
Poverty (GRAEEP). He is an objector to consumerism and
instrumental rationality, against the occidentalization of the
planet. Latouche is one of the most important proponents of
sustainable degrowth.
“...it is necessary to decolonize in our imagination these economic
and developmentist meanings (...) re-appropriate virtues of
communal wealth and convivial poverty in the development of
social relations, that is, a lifestyle based on the ethics of simplicity,
frugality, conviviality and solidarity – what some have advocated
under the Gandhi or Tolstoy slogan ‘voluntary simplicity.”

Presentation of this publication
This publication, sponsored by SESI and Syngenta,
aims to raise the need for legitimizing the ‘Sustaina-
bility Indicators of Nations’ (which can also be called
‘wealth indicators’ or ‘indicators of well-being, happi-
ness...’) so we can truly move towards the sustainability
of our planet.
The idea is to apply sustainable development patterns
that take into account environmental, economic, so-
cial, ethical and cultural aspects. For this purpose, in-
dicators that measure, monitor and assess such sustai-
nable patterns must be defined in order to guide our
future path.
The effort of ‘socially responsible’ business networks is
useless if we are governed without indicators consis-
tent with the sustainability movement agenda.
Despite not being new, this theme is not given enough
attention, as we will see in the valuable individual con-
tributions of Hazel Henderson, Rosa Alegria and Lala
Deheinzelin.
This publication was inspired in the work of Ladislau
Dowbor, from PUC, and Jose Eli da Veiga, from USP.
The ‘threshold hypothesis’ by Chilean Manfred Max
Neef and the ‘degrowth theory’ by French Serge La-
touhe helped us capture the dimension of the theme
and paved our way. The book ‘The New Wealth Indi-
cators’ by French writers Jean Gadrey and Florence
Jany-Catrice and the work ‘Reconsidering Wealth’ by
Patrick Viveret, among others, also contributed to the
development of this publication.
We will cover the main Sustainability Indicators of Na-
tions being applied abroad (UK, USA, Canada, Swit-
zerland, France, the Netherlands and Bhutan) and in
Brazil to show the broad range of tools available that
can serve as parameters for the analysis of what is
going on around the world regarding sustainability.
These indicators and indices provide information on
the state of biodiversity in the world; inequality and
poverty; advances towards sustainable societies; actual
progress and quality of life of nations; the use of natural
resources by individuals, cities, nations and mankind
in general; environment vulnerability; eco-efficiency
through which human well-being is obtained throu-
ghout the world, by nation or group of nations; and in-
dices that classify countries according to their capacity
to protect the environment along the next decades. We
will also cover monetary indices aimed at replacing the
GDP as a measure of progress of nations. They go far
INTRO
beyond the total measurement of economic activities
for taking into account to what extent national policies
truly result in better quality of life to all. Finally, we will
cover indices that relate the state of corporate respon-
sibility to the competitiveness of nations.
In short, this is a new analysis of the state of the world
that measures human development and environmental
conservation through the Wealth-Well-being Assess-
ment, where the illusion of the GDP metrics and its
current limitations have become pointless.
This is a continuous learning and evolution process towar-
ds the sustainability of the planet that requires everyone’s
understanding and commitment. We need to gather data,
measure the indicators and demand their application.
This theme has long been included in the UN agenda –
since 1990 with the HDI and the creation of the Com-
mission on Sustainable Development (CSD) following
the ‘Earth Summit.’ The OECD intends to move further
by assessing the happiness of all inhabitants of a coun-
try with the aid of more elaborate indicators. The UN
is receptive to this issue and is reviewing which new
parameters should be included in the next ‘Millennium
Development Goals – MDGs after 2015.’
Concrete examples of governments, companies and
civil society initiatives will show that practice has alre-
ady made room for advancing this agenda at the follo-
wing levels:
• International, such as the French government that has
established an Economic Performance and Social Progress
Measurement Commission – CMPEPS;
• International partnership, such as between the Fondation
France Libertes and the Brazilian State of Acre;
• State administrations in specific cities, such as the ‘Our
São Paulo’ and ‘Rio, how are we doing’ movements;
• Local administrations in rural areas/agribusiness, such as
the ‘Legal Lucas’ Project;
• Local administrations in the Amazon, such as the
‘Sustainable Juruti’ Project;
We will also see that several sectors are already de-
manding action, such as the Global Forum América
Latina, held in November, 2008 in Brazil.
Organizations that already take part in the effort to-
wards a more sustainable world were invited to spon-
sor this publication.
Finally, there is an appendix introducing the world of
‘eco labels’, still an embryonic practice in Brazil
3
INTRO
Letter from the Sponsors
Syngenta
In line with its CSR guidelines, Syngenta feels honored to
participate in and contribute to the production of the publi-
cation Knowledge Management – Sustainability Compen-
dium: Sustainability Indicators of Nations.
As an agribusiness company committed to sustainability,
Syngenta contributes to the supply of food in larger quanti-
ties and of higher quality to future generations. One example
is the permanent search for new technologies to provide so-
Itaipu
Changing any situation requires taking responsibility for its cre-
ation. When we consider that, regardless of the role each of us
has played, we all have contributed to the planet’s current status,
we can become more humble and aware that it is high time we
adopted a new attitude towards life. This is the time we feel deep
inside the urgency of an action that cannot be postponed. The
change starts individually and propagates by example.
All tools available to each segment – whether government, bu-
siness, academia or civil society – will be useful provided their
use is based on the best choices. Attitudes such as respect,
cooperation, carefulness and responsibility of human beings
towards each other and towards Nature seem to be the basis
of right decisions.
Itaipu Binacional believes in this idea. And since it was cre-
ated it has focused its behavior on the human being and
INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT
AKATU - Akatu Institute for
Conscious Consumption
CEBDS - Brazilian Business Council for
Sustainable Development
4
lutions that continuously optimize the use of natural resources,
such as water and soil.
Syngenta promotes sustainable agriculture as a key element for
its own business and its customers, and to ensure the society’s
future hoping to inspire other companies to engage in this sec-
tor and harvest good results.
Enjoy your reading.
Syngenta
the natural environment when managing the world’s largest
hydroelectric power plant. This behavior can be seen insi-
de and outside its walls in the respect for partners, in its
joint work with governments and society, in permanently
feeling responsible for its initiatives or the lack of them, for
we always change our surroundings, for the best or for the
worst, by action or omission.
This publication brings the best of what has been created to
guide human life towards well-being and harmony with natu-
re. We feel honored to help this Sustainability Compendium:
Sustainability Indicators of Nations to be inspiring to a larger
number of people and adopted as a tool to promote the chan-
ges we need to be happy.
Jorge Miguel Samek
Brazilian Director-General of Itaipu Binacional
CES - FGV Center for
Sustainability Studies
ETHOS - Ethos Institute – Business
and Social Responsibility

Letter from the Sponsors
SESI
Presented in the “Mapa Estratégico da Indústria 2007-2015”
(2007-2015 Strategic Map of Industry) – CNI (National Con-
federation of Industry) document developed with the help of
all affiliated State Industry Federations and tens of national
associations representing a wide range of industry sectors,
besides outstanding business leaders – the industry’s vision
of its perpetuity, its role in society and the sustainable de-
velopment fosters the corporate social responsibility culture
and the growing use of social and environmental manage-
ment tools.
In this context, the sustainability indicators presented in this
publication broaden and foster the understanding and imple-
mentation of an economic model that can be sustainable along
Shell
The challenge faced by the world is gigantic: we must en-
courage development and reduce poverty in a socially and
environmentally responsible manner. Helping respond to
this challenge and, at the same time, continuing to be a com-
petitive company forms the core of Shell’s contribution to
sustainable development. We seek to do it in a creative and
innovative way, and, above all, respecting people.
In this sense, we consider dialogue as key to building a solid
INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT
Núcleo Andrade Gutierrez de Sustentabilidade
e Responsabilidade Corporativa
FDC - Dom Cabral Foundation
Fundação Dom Cabral
FIDES - Social and Business Development
Institute Foundation
INTRO
time, raising awareness about the necessary balance of its eco-
nomic, social and environmental aspects, including the need to
reduce regional and social inequalities.
It is not by chance that SESI is currently considered as an effec-
tive social policy maker and manager for the production sector,
deserving society’s recognition as one of the most respected
organizations in the social area in the country. Present in the
26 States and in the Federal District, its services covering 2,055
municipalities, SESI is not only a pioneer in this area, but also
an agent of change.
Antonio Carlos Brito Maciel
Diretor-Superintendente do SESI
and inclusive future. By presenting in a structured format a
wide range of sustainability tools and instruments available
in the world, the book Knowledge Management – Sustai-
nability Compendium: Sustainability Indicators of Nations
will truly contribute to strengthening this dialogue and its
resulting experience sharing. The challenges are big and will
only be met if everyone participates, including civil society,
government and business.
GIFE - Group of Institutes,
Foundations and Companies
WHH - Willis Harman House /
AntaKaranA
5
INTRO

For the Sustainability Compendium, Brasil

Foreword By Hazel Henderson

I welcome this Sustainability Compendium as an indispensible guide to the key new tools for management in the 21st
century. Anne Louette brings deep expertise and insight into the assessment of all these tools for measuring social and
environmental performance of companies, governments and civic organizations worldwide.
This research covers a wide spectrum, identifying the new models, metrics, indicators and methodologies employed in this
paradigm shift toward managing human societies for long-term sustainability. For the accounting and statistical profes-
sions, sustainability reporting represents the greatest revolution since the invention of double-entry bookkeeping.
The early response of statisticians, accountants, business schools and corporate management was to dismiss all the new data
and events provided by changes in the Earth eco-systems, from pollution, losses of biodiversity and desertification to floods,
fires and extreme weather variability which were the earliest signs of climate change. Today, we understand that the planet
is our programmed learning environment, teaching humans directly, holding up a mirror to our behavior, belief-systems
and values. The Earth is showing us which of our ways of being and doing are now unsustainable, from waste and trivial
consumerism to continuous quarterly rises in corporate profits and fantasies of limitless GDP-growth.
One of the deepest errors that sustainability reporting corrects is the worldwide confusion propagated by conventional
economics which equates money with wealth. As we see by the rise in commodity prices, real wealth lies in natural resour-
ces and the services that healthy ecosystems provide to humans. We are learning these lessons in multiple ways, from oil
prices and understandable resource nationalism, that has now brought over 77% of the world’s proven oil reserves under the
control of governments rather than private companies and markets. The geo-politics of the new resource scarcities have
invalidated economic textbook assumptions that air, water and biodiversity were “free goods.”
Wars and military approaches to dispute-settlement are clearly obsolete. Today we see military experts and generals on
TV warning us that there are no military solutions in Iraq, Georgia or in today’s unfolding order where the USA is no lon-
ger the world’s superpower. Multi-lateral negotiations and sustainable forms of development will continue to be the main
geo-politics of the 21st century. Today’s weapons of choice are currencies, natural resources and the race toward universal
education, scientific and technological innovation beyond the fossil-fueled Industrialism of the past 300 years – toward the
Solar Age of cleaner, greener economies that work with Nature, not against her.
Human societies have been slowly adapting to all these Earth changes – each in their own culturally determined ways. The-
se adaptation processes within governments and corporations have been encouraged by the rise of civil society: “grassroots
globalists” convened in 1999 in Porto Alegre at the first gathering of the now truly global World Social Forum. The rise of
the global information society, thanks to the internet, now is morphing into a new Age of Truth where citizens can expose
corporate and government wrong-doing and damage a company’s brand, reputation and stock price in real time.
Hence, the crucial importance of all the new models, metrics, indicators and other tools for social and environmental ma-
nagement compiled in this volume, which allows comparability, communication between practitioners and acceleration of
methodological advances.
This book also meets the needs of everyday managers, as well as academics who must rapidly overhaul curricula in business
schools worldwide. Here, Brasil has also pioneered through the ground-breaking work of the Instituto Ethos, Uni-Ethos
and such management institutes as Fundacao dom Cabral, Fundação Getulio Vargas and Amana-Key Desinvolvimento y
Educacao, Willis Harman House and the World Business Academy. New media can accelerate social learning as with my
Ethical Markets Media, LLC, in the USA and Europe and our partner, Mercado Etico in Brasil.
While corporations have made much progress in sustainability reporting, finance is still catching up: The UN Principles of
Responsible Investing (now representing $15 trillion in managed assets) and the Carbon Disclosure Project ($54 trillion) are
leading the way, together with the Equator Principles and BOVESPAS’s ISE Index. Capital asset pricing models still need
to fully incorporate environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria, and the Global Reporting Initiative’s triple-bottom
line needs to be extended to all global corporations and security analysis.
The implosion of Wall Street’s risk-analyses models and the reckless use of leverage, derivatives, speculation and short-
selling provide a tragic lesson on the vital role of ethics and trust in all markets. The limits of greed, self-interest, envy,
avarice, accumulation, hoarding and excessive competition, all deadly sins in most religions, are now clear. And at last, after
decades of effort, the childish fantasies of an ever-growing GDP are facing up to reality.

6
 INTRO

I was present at the signing of Agenda 21 in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 where over 170 countries agreed to overhaul their GDP
accounting. I presented at the European Parliament’s “Taking Nature into Account” conference in 1995. I created the
Calvert-Henderson Quality of Life Indicators with the Calvert Group in 2000 (updated regularly at www.calvert-henderson.
com). I was honored to present these indicators at the Parliament of Latin America, EUROSTAT and many other venues
in China, Japan, Australia, and in 2003 in Curitiba at the ICONS conference where 700 business leaders and statisticians
endorsed the many new “quality of life” metrics needed in national accounts (“Statisticians of the World Unite!” at www.
hazelhenderson.com).
In 2007, I co-organized the “Beyond GDP” debate in the European Parliament where another 700 members of parliament
and statisticians endorsed all these same corrections to GDP. Globescan of London and Ethical Markets Media, LLC, con-
ducted a survey in 10 countries for the European Commission on the Beyond GDP issue. Huge majorities in all 10 coun-
tries, including Brasil (69%) supported correcting GDP to help steer countries toward sustainability (www.beyond-gdp.eu).
Even the USA is awakening, and the Senate held hearings in March 2008 on “Re-thinking GDP.”
With this important Sustainability Compendium, all these issues from local to corporate to global come together in a superb
overview to guide us to a better future.
Hazel Henderson
St. Augustine, Florida, September 2008

7
INTRO

The future reinvents values

Since the first edition of the international conference on new sustainability indicators and quality of life, held in Curitiba, Brazil,
in 2003, of which I was one of the organizers, the economy started to shift towards a more systemic and responsible direction.
Considering the theory of complexity that seeks to explain the systems effect of changes, the ICONS (International Conference
on Sustainable Development and Quality of Life Indicators) was like the flapping of a butterfly’s wing that caused impacts on
several corners of the world.
Over 700 researchers and experts gathered in Curitiba to discuss new ways of measuring wealth and alternatives to break some
traditional paradigms in the agendas of nations that follow the narrow-minded GDP values.
For believing in the Brazilian potential to embrace the new and in the need to balance economic forces integrated into ecolo-
gical and cultural forces, the futurist Hazel Henderson created the ICONS in partnership with Thais Corral, REDEH (Human
Development Network) coordinator, and myself, at that time acting on behalf of the Future Studies Center (NEF) at PUC-SP. We
were encouraged and supported by the participation of social and economic development organizations (Ethos, Akatu, ABDL,
FIEP, IBGE, IPEA) and a group of world’s leading researchers (Mathis Wackernagel, Paul Epstein, David Berry, Sander Tideman,
Paul Novacek, Eduardo Moreno, among others).
At that time, the international financial system was already pointing out the need for a radical reform and challenging some
acute observers in their ability to explain so much social injustice and ecological imbalance.
Hazel referred to the lack of vision of most politicians in the way they addressed public policy as a factor of social and econo-
mic stagnation and environmental degradation. In her inaugural address, she said: ‘Most politicians still follow old economics
books. They want to decrease unemployment, inflation, deficit and interest rates, but they forget that global interactions are a
woven fabric influencing each one of these rates. Once one goes down, the others go up.’
Sander Tideman, then Bhutan Government consultant for the implementation of the GNH (Gross National Happiness) index,
said human needs should always be met taking happiness into account. He brought the word compassion into the business
world, in the search for well-being to all.
Sustainability has also been submitted to information management and that was highlighted by the economist Ladislau Dow-
bor: ‘We have core technologies and information, but organized knowledge tools have not been developed for citizen action.
Amid all the statistics compendiums and mountains of fragmented media information, we go on essentially confused’, informed
Dowbor.
Among other deep thoughts about the new routes to decision-making, since ICONS 2003 in Curitiba, which became a lan-
dmark in Brazil and worldwide, many other butterflies have been flapping their wings throughout governmental sectors of
the world economy. Conferences such as the ones in Bhutan (GNH) and Belgium (Beyond GDP) enhanced the process of
questioning GDP, putting it in the hot seat and bringing new indicators on the world economy stage. New indicators, such as
Calvert-Henderson, GNH and Ecological Footprints, became important issues in the agendas of several countries and started
to influence public policy development and gather together notable thoughts and practices.
Whether reinventing capitalism or creating new economic systems impelled by the deep 2008 crisis (5 years after ICONS), the
opportunities are huge and numerous: local development, alternative currencies, inclusion of intangibles in public budgets,
ecological assets accounting, the strength of creative economy, cooperative advantages, human capital, the break of patents and
frontiers of knowledge, access to new information technologies, reassessment of what wealth is, and the exhaustion of hyper-
consumerism. All elements sum up in this arena of change and new future, and the big question is: what should we measure to
make the right decisions?
Following the ICONS in Curitiba 5 years ago, many changes have taken place. Now it is time to collect all that has been created,
change our metrics, get mobilized, gather our mental and spiritual energy, recover our visions of future and occupy the public
and private spaces in a collective process of imagination that will take us to the society we dream of.
The work of Anne Louette in this Compendium serves as a compass in the creation of a new society. Differently from what
many may think, the future is not meant to be forecast, but collectively imagined and created so we can change the present right
now. Many tools useful in the creation of the future and reinvention of values are presented in this Compendium.
Rosa Alegria

8
 INTRO
Creative economy and the reinvention
of the economy
Evolution occurs in leaps and we are in the middle of one. And this is a huge leap that sets the transition of centuries, or even millenniums,
when life was organized around material, tangible matters to an era when the intangible plays an increasingly central role. This is also a
time of natural resources crisis, because land, gold and oil are finite and are being depleted, thus strengthening the importance of intan-
gible resources. Knowledge, culture and creativity not only are resources that cannot be depleted, but the only ones that are renewed and
multiplied by use. If I share an apple with you, each one of us gets half of it. If I share my knowledge with you, it triples: we get mine, yours
and the result of our interaction.

Whereas the tangible/material is finite and limited, the intangible is elastic, unlimited, and can be the way to more inclusive models based
in cooperation. When added to the digital technologies (bits are also infinite), we get a myriad of collaborative options and a new term can
be coined: ‘abundance economy’ – which may originate more solidary lifestyles.

Furthermore, activities based on intangible resources are multi-dimensional and can influence the four dimensions of sustainability: econo-
mic, social, environmental and symbolic/cultural. They sure have a strong economic impact, but can go beyond that, acting as an environ-
mentally correct social interaction factor that strengthens values, edges and credibility of communities and companies.

In theory, it all sounds wonderful, representing a potential that reminds us of a hen that lays golden eggs. The fact is, if we remain stuck with
old models, our policies and structures will end up in a chicken soup of the hen that lays golden eggs.

blic-private sectors, third sector and creative entrepreneurs become aware of the change of times we are going through, the huge potential
if offers, and the necessary shift in mentality and policies so we can take advantage of it. A core theme is the need to change wealth indica-
tors and measurement and assessment methods. Trying to quantitatively measure the intangible resources or the four dimensions of sustai-
nability is like trying to measure water with a measuring tape. It is impossible. We cannot measure multidimensional things in a linear way.

The economy itself calls for revision, since one of its definitions used to be ‘scarce resources management.’ Creativity and culture are abun-
dant resources, mainly in the Southern hemisphere countries, and are an enormous asset that may lead to a thorough change in the concept
of wealth and poverty. Resources go far beyond the idea of having money, and besides the economic dimension, should include the cultural,
social and environmental dimensions as well.

Practice shows that the sustainable development equation is not simply economic. Each dimension has its own capital: human capital, cul-
tural capital, social capital, environmental capital. This leads to a little known and studied currency exchange: investment made in monetary
currency, for instance, may have a return in social currency; investment made in environmental currency may have a return in symbolic
currency, and so on. Examples such as the music from the State of Pará in Brazil or audiovisual arts from Nigeria show how such conversion
of ‘currencies’ works: the key success factor in these models lies in distribution, because these products are sold by street vendors. In this
process, the monetary currency resulting from copyright is not received, but the visibility-currency is received, making the authors well
known and desired, enhancing their market, which in turn generates the constant innovation currency, thus creating a broad and dynamic
process that eventually generates monetary currency.

Measuring the intangible also implies shifting from an exclusively quantitative vision to one that includes the qualitative. The focus on
results must be broadened to include the assessment of impacts: checking what has changed and the resulting benefits in other dimensions
besides the economic one. Assessing results of music programs in the slums, such as the Affroreggae project, by the number of musicians
that became professionals is like measuring liquid with a measuring tape. How much is the self-esteem of a community worth? How much
are spared lives worth? How much is believing in the future worth?

Assessing and measuring creative and cultural activities requires parameters yet to be developed. For instance, the dance economy is little,
maybe just the small sum of dancers, choreographers and performances. However, the economy of ‘dancing’ is large because it includes
festivals (such as Carnival); nightlife; the entire fitness structure and respective equipment, rooms, contents, costumes, and so on.

The same way that, at the micro level, local projects development and their assessment and measurement methods should be multidimen-
sional and have their ‘capitals’ and ‘currencies’ to represent such dimensions, the macro level should also have wealth and development
indicators to assess governments and nations.

Comprehensive indicators must include natural and cultural wealth and diversity – the pillars of professional and personal relations: ethics,
self esteem, solidarity, trust and other factors that ensure quality of life in a broader sense as proposed by the Gross National Happiness
Index from Bhutan.

After all, for the first time in history we have resources, knowledge and people to create the world we want and deserve. It is a rare oppor-
tunity – made even more urgent and explicit by the crisis caused by the predatory ‘financialism’ – we can seize by reinventing the economy.

We are ending an era of great innovation, when several factors and languages had to become more ‘economy-oriented’. From now on, the
Economy will have to broaden its own sense to justify the Eco it bears – originated from the Greek word Oikos (house, home) as in Ecology.
A New Economy to manage the abundant resources offered by the intangible resources and technology, in a world based on the perception
of our inter-dependency and, consequently, aware that the answer lies in cooperation. A new Inclusive economy, whose dynamics will
result from the harmonious relationship between the macro economy of scale and the micro economy of niches. A new economy that will
require new measures, currencies and indicators.

Lala Deheinzelin

9
INTRO

Indicators: after all, what are we measuring?1

“This publication ‘Sustainability Compendium: Sustainability Indicators of Nations’, by presenting a wide range
of indicators – either used or under review –becomes an important working tool. Similarly, the previous volume
‘Sustainability Compendium: Social and Environmental Responsibility Management Tools’, also organized by Anne
Louette, presented a range of methodologies aimed at assessing corporate social and environmental responsibility. Such
contributions gradually enrich our ability to organize knowledge and ensure a more sustainable development.”

Ladislau Dowbor

If we want to guide the economy, rationally channeling our production efforts to desired results, we must build assessment
tools for such results. Celso Furtado uses the ‘social profitability’ concept, which despite saying fundamental things, may
lead us to mistake the vision of macroeconomic productivity for that of the productivity of sectors usually identified with
the ‘social’ sphere, such as education, health, etc. The systemic productivity2 concept may be more explicit2.
The basic logic is simple: when a large soybean producer forces small farmers away from their land to suburban areas, we
may say there has been an increase in grain production by hectare and agribusiness productivity. The businessperson may
say that he has enriched the town. However, if we measure the costs generated for the society with the slums created and
water pollution, for instance, or even the discomfort of families expelled from their land and unemployment, the result is
quite different. By calculating soybean production increase, but deducting society’s indirect costs, the systemic balance will
be more comprehensive and technically correct. In other words, we must evolve towards an accounting that shows results
in terms of quality of life and actual social progress.
Similarly, when a country sells its natural resources, its accounts shows it as GDP increase, when in fact the country is
selling its inherited natural resources, which was not produced and will not be replenished. Therefore, the country is deca-
pitalizing itself, increasing its short-term wealth at the expense of future difficulties.
What we have inherited, methodologically speaking, is the national accounts system developed in the 1950s by the United
Nations, and altered in 1993, which provides us with the well-known GDP – the sum of values and costs of goods and
services production – therefore restricted to commercial activities. We will not describe here the limitations of this me-
thodology, already obvious3. What matters is that from the 1990s on, with the concepts of Amartya Sen4 and the Human
Development Index (HDI) methodology, there has been a radical inversion: the human being is no longer regarded as a tool
to serve companies – at that time the World Bank said education was good because it would increase business productivity
– but as the primary objective. In other words, the social aspect is no longer a means to ensure economic objectives; much
on the contrary, the economy becomes a means to improve people’s quality of life. A life with health, education, culture,
leisure, safety, is what everyone expects. The economy must serve these social objectives.
Quality of life is clearly harder to be measured than a company’s total sales volume, or a public school’s overhead, let alone
the economy of volunteer work or household labor. The truth is that as long as we do not adopt generally accepted and
standardized methods to measure the bottom line of our activities, we will neither be able to assess public nor private
policy. Currently, making use of and going beyond the HDI methodologies, we have moved way ahead. Jean Gadrey and
Florence Jany Catrice’s book, Les Nouveaux Indicateurs de Richesse (the new wealth indicators), presents an extremely well
organized systematization of the new conceptual framework for national accounts being devised5. In this way, there is a
distinction between production accounting (outputs) and actual results in terms of social values (outcomes); economic, so-
cial and environmental indicators; objective indicators (such as infant mortality rate) and subjective ones (level of satisfac-
tion); monetary and non-monetary results. This has led to the development of several methodologies that are currently well
structured, such as the Index of Economic Well-being (IEWB) by Osberg and Sharpe, the Index of Sustainable Economic
Welfare (ISEW), the Genuine Progress Indicators (GPV), the World Bank’s Genuine Savings Indicator (GSI), and others.

(1) See ‘Democracia Econômica’, by Ladislau Dowbor, Vozes, 2008)

(2) Everyone has been looking for a concept that better reflects the expected social and economic results, since mere economic productivity is too narrow to express
social objectives. Jörg Meyer-Stamer uses the Systemic Competitiveness Concept in his work on Local and Regional Development Strategy Initiatives; The Economist uses
the ‘social return’ concept to calculate the impact of social investment that make ‘the best possible contribution to society’s problems.’ H. Schmitz uses the ‘collective
efficiency’ concept (in Vázquez-Barquero).
(3) See ‘A Reprodução Social’ by Ladislau Dowbor, Vozes, Petrópolis, 2003
(4) See ‘Development as Freedom’ by Amartya Sen, Random House, New York, 1999
(5) See ‘Les Nouveaux Indicateurs de Richesse’ by Jean Gadrey and Florence Jany-Catrice, La Découverte, Paris 2005 .See also the report ‘Reconsidering Wealth’ by Patrick
Viveret, 2001

10
 INTRO

Of special interest, the methodology adopted by Calvert-Henderson Quality of Life Indicators: a New Tool for Assessing
National Trends6, is a true review of national accounts applied to the United States. Instead of simply summing up the
monetary results, the accounts are broken down in 12 domestic sectors, including income, but also human rights, public
safety, environment, and so on. As a result, North-Americans have, for the first time, a tool to evaluate how and in which
areas the country is improving (or getting worse). Neither new indicators nor new surveys were required. The most reliable
existing data were selected and tabulated according to the major axes of practical results expected by the population.
The World Bank itself is rethinking its methodologies. In the World Development Indicators 20037 Table 3.15 that assesses
savings, the Bank now records timber extraction, for instance, not as a positive figure (GDP increase), but as decapitalization
of he country. Following the same logic, oil-exporting countries are now regarded as depleting their natural capital, thus
showing negative savings rate. As for the car manufacturing sector, additional pollution-related health costs are now deduc-
ted. Considering the strong inductive effect of the World Bank’s methodologies, this openness is welcome and will influence
national accounts in several countries.
It is also worth mentioning the work Survey of Existing Approaches to Measuring Socio-Economic Progress, prepared by
INSEE, in Paris, OECD staff and other institutions. The document presents a review of the progress in the development of
methodologies in 20088. The participation of the World Bank, OECD and recent collaborators such as Stiglitz and other
economists attests the maturity and openness to change achieved in the debate.
There are other similarly creative and very practical solutions. In the region of Cascavel (State of Paraná, Brazil), for ins-
tance, 22 towns started developing local quality of life indicators9. 26 relatively simple indicators help evaluate whether the
population’s situation is improving or not, year by year. In this way, people can make informed decisions when voting accor-
ding to actual results in their lives and not according to who has given away more electoral campaign T-shirts. The innova-
tion has not demanded major changes in the calculation, because existing data was used, but it meant a significant political
shift: the information is organized for the population and the data surveyed are those of highest interest to the population’s
quality of life. In other words, economic accounts become a citizenship tool, and the initiatives of several public and private
actors can be evaluated in terms of final results for the society, at least in a more circumscribed territory, where people can
more easily take part in decision-making processes.
Anyway, what we are saying here is that a change in the focus of economic accounts is essential. A bank that misappropriates
our savings and invests them in speculative financial investment shows high profit, which in turn increases the GDP, but
reduces our systemic productivity by decapitalizing the communities and reducing the productive use of our savings. The
German system of financial intermediation, based on small local economic savings, shows small profits, but channels the sa-
vings to socially useful investments, generating better life conditions to all10. ‘Profit’, according to this vision, must be social,
and productivity must be systemic. The evolution of economic sciences towards this comprehensive accounting, rather than
a microeconomic one, is a major advance.
In broad terms, a major advance in economic sciences is the radical change in the way we organize information around results
achieved. While the measure was limited to adding companies’ production value and public services costs, we naturally believed
progress exclusively resulted from business profit, and also that public services were a burden. When we adopt the systemic
evaluation of results for the society as a whole, we reach an intelligent vision of the actual progress achieved. The development of
more realistic evaluation systems of our economic and social progress corrects a structural flaw in economic sciences.
Most of our feeling of impotence before the economic dynamics derives simply from the lack of tools to know the actual
contribution of the different activities to our well-being. The media hysterically demands a few extra percentage points in
the GDP increase, which intensifies the generalized anxiety over unemployment, and distracts our focus from the main
objective – society’s quality of life – leaving everyone confused and misinformed. Of course, badly informed people do not
participate in anything. There is no economic democracy without adequate information about the dynamics and results that
really matter. The development of new indicators of wealth is a particularly important axis in this direction.

Referência
http://dowbor.org

(6) See Hazel Henderson, Jon Lickerman and Patrice Flynn (editors) – Calvert Henderson Quality of Life Indicators: a new tool for assessing national trends. www.
calvertgroup.com
(7) See World Bank – World Development Indicators 2003, Washington, 2003, page 174
(8) See http://www.stiglitz sen fitoussi.fr/documents/Survey_of_Existing_Approaches_to_Measuring_Socio-Economic_Progress.pdf
(9) See Conceito e Metodologia de Aplicação (Application Concept and Methodology) – Versão 1, October, 2001 (paper).
(10) See The Economist, June 26th, 2004, p. 77. (The Economist naturally laments that German regional legislators ‘refuse to authorize the sale of savings institutions,
owned by local communities, to private sector buyers’).

11
INTRO

New indicators to evaluate true wealth

“The social indicator only indicates; it does not replace
the concept it originated from.”
(Januzzi, 2002)
“It’s necessary to reflect in order to measure, not to
measure in order to reflec.”
(Bachelard)
The Meadows et al. (1972) report, entitled The Limits to
Growth, challenged the idea that economic abundance
and industrial growth had no frontiers: ‘If the present
growth trends in world population, industrialization,
pollution, food production, and resource depletion conti-
nue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be
reached sometime within the next 100 years. The most
probable result will be a sudden and uncontrollable decli-
ne in both population and industrial capacity.’ However,
along with this distressing scenario, the Meadows Report
had already found the key to sustainable development: ‘It
is possible to alter these growth trends and to establish
a condition of ecological and economic stability that is
sustainable far into the future.’
A short time later, a publication by the International
Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
– IUCN – also used the term ‘sustainable development1’
to describe the necessary development model to preserve
the planet’s richness.
Following that, in the Brundtland Report (1983) – also
known as Our Common Future, by the United Nations
World Commission on Environment and Develop-
ment – the human dimension was strongly enhanced in
the concept of sustainable development. Besides the en-
vironmental problems, Brundtland Report showed the
need for an international awareness of the ‘human con-
dition deterioration’, mainly in terms of extreme poverty
and inequality.
The “environmental, social and economic’ tripod was ac-
cepted and formalized in the United Nations Conferen-
ce on Environment and Development (Earth Summit -
1992), held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. In this Conference,
1,600 scientists, among whom 102 Nobel Prize laureates
from 70 countries, launched the document ‘World Scien-
tists’ Warning to Humanity”. It warned that: ‘Man and
nature are in a head-on collision. Human activities inflict
harsh and often irreversible damage on the environment
and on critical resources. Mankind must change; changes
must be made immediately in order to reverse the fate of
a head-on collision”. At the time, the need to develop indi-
cators able to measure sustainability was raised, since the
tools available, among which the GNP, did not provide
enough data for analysis.
The Conference’s resulting document, Agenda 21, highli-
ghts in its chapter 40,: “Commonly used indicators such
as the gross national product (GNP) and measurements
of individual resource or pollution flows do not provide
adequate indications of sustainability. Methods for asses-
sing interactions between different sectoral environmen-
tal, demographic, social and developmental parameters
are not sufficiently developed or applied. Indicators of
sustainable development need to be developed to provide
solid bases for decision-making at all levels and to con-
tribute to a self-regulating sustainability of integrated en-
vironment and development systems” (United Nations,
1992). Since the Agenda 21, 178 signatory countries have
agreed to correct distortions resulting from evaluations
based exclusively on the GNP.

(1) Sustainable development: the idea initially came from the Limits to Growth Report written by the MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), which was
commissioned by the Club of Rome, founded by Aurelio Peccei, and later from the ecodevelopment concept proposed in 1970 by Maurice Strong and Ignacy Sachs, during
the first United Nations Conference on Environment and Development – UNCED (Stockholm, 1972), which originated the United Nations Environment Program – UNEP.
In 1987, the World Commission of Environment and Development, chaired by the Norwegian Prime Minister, Gro Harlem Brundtland, adopted the sustainable development
concept in its report entitled Our Common Future, also known as the Brundtland Report.
The concept was definitely incorporated as a principle during the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, the 1992 Earth Summit – Rio-92, in Rio
de Janeiro. (www.wikipedia.org.br)

12
 INTRO

GDP – Gross Domestic Product – is the most widely tal areas have participated. A large number of proposals
used economic activity indicator. It is in the core of all have been developed.
Systems of National Accounts, and its methodology is
Despite all these initiatives, neither a personal measure nor
strictly defined and regulated, allowing international
a set of indicators have been broadly acknowledged within
comparison and aggregation. GDP combines in a single
the political context and by the general public. Perhaps this
indicator the total market value of all final goods and
is because there has been little consensus about fundamen-
services produced in the economic territory of a country
tal concepts or lack of the analytical simplicity that ensured
within a certain period of time. In most cases, it is calcu-
GDP’s success.
lated on a quarterly or annual basis. GDP changes along
time are the main indicator of macroeconomic activity However, the results of these events show a gradual increa-
growth (www.beyond-gdp.eu). se in the process of warning about the dangers of the GDP,
starting by the warning made by one of its chief architects
Since then, at the dawn of this century, several nations Simon Kuznets (1901-1981), Nobel Prize of Economy lau-
have made serious commitments in this direction in reate in 1971, who cautioned in a 1932 report to the US
numerous global events. Congress that ‘the welfare of a nation can scarcely be infer-
It is also worth mentioning the pioneering contribution red from a measurement of national income.’
of the Measure of Economic Welfare (MEW), by William
Nordhaus and James Tobin (1972). REFERENCE
Information gathered at the France Libertes Fondation
GDP’s shortcomings started to come out, becoming incre- Danielle Mitterrand website www.france-libertes.fr, and
asingly evident at the following events: websites www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr and www.beyond gdp.eu.
• UN Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, 1992;
• Conference sponsored by the European Parliament on the
theme ‘Taking Nature into Account’, 1995;
• ‘Beyond Growth: Policies and Institutions for
Sustainability’, in Santiago, Chile, 1998;
• ‘World Summit on Sustainable Development’, in
Johannesburg, 2002, the so-called Rio+10;
• UN Convention on Biological Diversity, in which the
Millennium Development Goals were set, in Kuala Lumpur.

The latest international conferences held by the Europe-

an Commission, European Parliament, the Club of Rome,
OECD and WWF have helped publicize the initiatives in
force that clarify which indices are most suitable to mea-
sure progress and how they can be integrated into the de-
cision-making processes and brought to public discussion.
As examples, we can mention:
• World Forum on Measuring Well-being and the Progress of
Societies, in Milan, June, 2006;
• OECD World Forum on Measuring and Fostering the
Progress of Societies, in Istanbul, June, 2007;
• EU Conference on Beyond GDP: Measuring Progress,
True Wealth and the Well-being of Nations’ in Brussels,
November, 2007;
• World Forum on ‘Statistics, Knowledge and Policy’, in
Palermo, 2008.

Conferences have always gathered top-class experts and

influential politicians to solve these critical issues. Over
500 people from the economic, social and environmen-

13
INTRO
Criticism of the GDP
The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is high in the me-
dia and is nowadays an almost world reference for most
of the analyses. Thousands of opinion-makers and deci-
sion-makers in the economic, political or scientific fiel-
ds have their decisions permanently guided by the GDP,
which serves as a compass for their actions.
The GDP is the total value of all final goods and services
produced within a certain region or part of society (i.e.
countries, states, cities) during a specified period (mon-
th, quarter, year, etc.). It assesses the productive contri-
bution of the economic activities.
The classical equation to determine the GDP of a region
is the following:
Y=C+I+G+X-M
Where
• Y is GDP
• C is consumption
• I is gross investment
• G is government spending
• X is net exports
• M is net imports
After all, is it true that the higher the GDP, the more
wealth is created by a country?
Defining what a country’s wealth consists of has become
a task that requires examining various economic, social
and environmental aspects. From this perspective, high
GDP indices are no longer a guarantee of sustainable
development.
Let us then examine some of the main criticisms faced
by the GDP. (Source: Jean Gadrey. Les nouveaux indica-
teurs de richesse).
1. Everything that can be sold and has an aggregate
monetary value will increase the GDP and growth,
which not necessarily means sustainable develop-
ment and increased individual and collective well-
being.
The GDP positively records all forms of evil and des-
truction, such as increase in the number of accidents,
progression of illnesses stemming from food insecurity,
pollution… (which, to be offset, requires defensive ex-
penditures) the same way it accounts for common well-
being resources (education and participation in cultural
and leisure activities in a society where people are heal-
thy, for instance).
14
In other words, the two societies would have the same
increase in the GDP, once the GDP computes all resour-
ces as increase in GDP, regardless of their purpose.
It would be necessary to suppress the GDP increase of the
first hypothetical society to better assess the actual cre-
ation of wealth (the one that contributes to well-being).
The same idea can be applied to expenses on repairing
environmental damage caused by human activities:
pollution, depletion of natural resources, which lead to
decreased well-being.
2. Well-being losses caused by economic growth are
not measured anywhere. Despite having no commer-
cial value, they may have a huge value for our well-
being and that of future generations.
The destruction, for instance, of the Amazon Forest is
an activity that makes the world GDP increase (value
of the timber harvested and the tractor to cut it down,
etc.). The resulting loss of natural capital, its effects on
the climate, biodiversity, and the long-term needs of fu-
ture generations are not measured anywhere.
In other words, the GDP does not deduct the losses of
natural capital, but makes additions to account for its
organized destruction.
Besides these examples in which well-being losses are
not recorded, there are others in which gains – or es-
sential contributions to well-being – are disregarded,
including the following:
3. Many activities and resources that contribute to
the well-being are unaccounted for, simply because
they are not commercial or because they have no di-
rect monetary production costs.
Volunteer work and household labor (not only performed
at home, mostly by women, but also the broader realm
of our neighborhoods and communities) are examples of
forgotten contributions, which, for being unpaid, are not
part of the activities that contribute to the domestic wealth
that is measured by the GDP. But is it true that these types
of work do not create wealth and well-being as much as
the paid work? These are invisible types of work by nature.
Nevertheless, they represent huge volumes and contribute
to the well-being as much as the paid work. In developed
countries, the time spent in household chores is estimated
to be equal to the total time spent in paid work. If we deci-
ded, for instance, to give it the same monetary value as the
working hour, which could double the GDP, representing
a considerable amount of ignored wealth.
 INTRO

4. The GDP measures only the amounts produced

(outputs) and ignores results in terms of satisfaction
and well-being resulting from the consumption of
such goods (outcomes), which are more important
to measure progress. This measure does not indicate
the well-being of a society.
If, in order to reach high growth rates, we force or encou-
rage people to work more and more and to have less leisure
and free time, this phenomenon will be considered as pro-
gress by the GDP, for the GDP does not take into account
that increased free time is a wealth that deserves being va-
lued. This example was not taken by chance: in the United
States, since 1980, the average annual working hours has
risen five hours a year (240 hours), as opposed to what has
happened to almost all European countries. Here is a good
example of an essential contribution to well-being – free
time – that is not part of the wealth accounts.
5. The GDP measurement is also indifferent to the
accounting of wealth distribution, to inequalities,
poverty, economic safety, etc, which are, neverthe-
less, considered almost exclusively as dimensions of
a society’s well-being.
We do not know, by simply looking at the average GDP,
how this income is shared among the local people.
The economic development of a country is a necessa-
ry condition, by is not enough for social development
and improved life conditions of its population to oc-
cur. A 2-3% growth for some years might, as the case
may be, come together with an increase or a reduction
in social inequalities. Does not it make any difference
to live in a society where masses of poor coexist with
a handful of rich people? Would not one more euro
or dollar of growth in the pocket of a poor person ge-
nerate more well-being than the same amount in the
pocket of a rich person?
It is definitely not enough to produce more.
It is necessary to consider what (criticism 1), to whom
(criticism 5), how we are producing (criticisms 2, 3 and
4), and what its balance is. It is important to rethink how
we are measuring this wealth. A wealth that leads us to
sustainable development. A development towards com-
mon well-being, as a means and not as an end.
We must redefine the terms of wealth. Sustainable de-
velopment will be possible only if a true reconsidera-
tion of the economic pillar transforms the economic
vision and practice. It is not enough to add an environ-
mental pillar and then a social pillar to an economic
pillar that would remain unaltered.

15
INTRO

The Growth Myth

‘We should remember, in the first place, that the classical economists were all moral philosophers. For them, the economy was well-being-,
human happiness‑oriented. This view changed with the neoclassical thought, at the end of the 19th Century. At that moment, something
unexpected happened: the economy was no longer philosophical and became extremely mathematical, figures-oriented. The more
mathematical it was, the more scientific it would be. From this new perspective, reality reflects the economy and not the contrary. In this
economy, only what can be turned into figures matters. Consequently, the neoclassical economists do not know how to deal with human
needs, which are, therefore, disregarded. They ignore them and guide themselves by preferences, by measuring what is bought at the
supermarket. This model allows plenty of calculations and numbers, but it is totally out of the reality. The neoliberalism, so highly regarded
at the end of the 20th Century, is no more than an offspring of this neoclassical economy, totally detached from reality.’

(Manfred Max Neef ).

ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE OR SOCIAL

PROGRESS? Average $23.000
per-person after-tax $22.000
income in 1995
It is known that a deceleration in economic growth drives $21.000
$20.000
our societies to despair due to unemployment and the ne- $19.000 100%
glect of our social, cultural and environmental programs $18.000 90
that guarantee a minimum quality of life. Imagine how $17.000
80
$16.000
catastrophic a negative growth rate would be! The same $15.000 70
way there is nothing worse than a labor society with no $14.000 Personal
P n Income
n e
60
jobs, there is nothing worse than a growth society with $13.000
$12.000
no growth. Growth for its own sake becomes the primary $11.000
Percentage 50
Very Happy
objective, if not the only one in life. $10.000 40
$9.000
30
In most societies worldwide, there still is consensus that $8.000
$7.000 20
economic growth is the solution for a wide range of social
$6.000
problems, including poverty, pollution and scarce natural $5.000
10 Percentage
describing themselves
resources. A more productive and abundant economy se- $4.000 0 as verry happy
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
ems to have the power to solve this general malaise. We Ano
can even identify its origin at the start of the 20th Century
in the work of the economist AC Pigou (1920), who sta-
Thailand. They all went through a period of strong eco-
ted that economic well-being followed social well-being.
nomic growth and development for three decades until
‘There is a presumption that qualitative conclusions about
1970. After that, the population’s quality of life level star-
the effect of an economic cause upon economic welfare
ted to drop. This result was achieved by comparing the
will hold good also of the effect on total welfare’’.
GDP growth curve to another index – the GPI (Genuine
It is no easy task to oppose a widespread thought among Progress Indicator), which measures quality of life. Gra-
the political and economic class, which states that our ha- phs’ analysis showed an increasing trend of decrease in
ppiness must necessarily go through more growth, more GPI per capita while there is an increase in GDP per capi-
productivity, more buying power, and therefore, more ta. This phenomenon led Manfred Max-Neef to write the
consumption! ‘Threshold Hypothesis : ‘up to an extent in the economy,
the increase in trade transactions captured by the GDP
IMPACT OF ECONOMIC GROWTH ON OTHER may reflect evolution in wealth, well-being or quality of
FORMS OF WEALTH ECONOMIC GROWTH life. Beyond that, however, the GDP performance is in no
AND OUR WELL-BEING – THE THRESHOLD way an indicator of material progress.
HYPOTHESIS Since the 70s, the economic growth has increased where-
as the GPI has dropped.
According to the threshold theory, created by the Chi-
The high life standard most people from the Northern
lean economist Manfred Max Neef and his colleagues
Hemisphere believe they have has increasingly become
15 years ago, economic growth is aligned with the
an illusion. Of course they spend more in terms of goo-
society’s quality of life up to a certain extent. Beyond
ds and services, but they forget to deduct the increase in
that, it tends to become malignant to the people’s well-
their costs. It has many different faces, commercial and
being: the economic system becomes self-destructive.
non-commercial ones, such as quality of life degradation
This theory has been tested in every country where stu- – non-quantified, but burdensome (air, water, environ-
dies were carried out, such as the United States, England, ment) –, ‘compensation’ expenses (medication, transport,
the Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Denmark, Chile and leisure) as modern life new needs, price increase in scarce

16

goods (bottled water, energy, green areas).
Manfred Max Neef’s economy is based on six principles:
1. The economy must serve the people, rather than the people
serving the economy.
2. Economic development is about people and not objects.
3. Growth is not the same as development, and development
does not necessarily require growth.
4. No economy can exist in the absence of eco-systems.
5. An economy cannot have infinite potential, because it exists
in a finite sub-system of the biosphere.
6. Under no circumstance can any economic process or
interest be above life.
Current life is totally contrary to these principles.
IMPACT OF ECONOMIC GROWTH ON OTHER
FORMS OF WEALTH ECONOMIC GROWTH AND
RESPECT FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
The industrial development model followed by western
countries and based on the orthodox economic theory has
far too often neglected the impact of economic growth on
other forms of wealth and well-being. Today, this negligen-
ce is implicit in most economic debates. In fact, analysts
have for a long time acknowledged the need to take into
account the effects of human economic activity on non-
renewable natural resources.
In order to reconcile the two opposing imperatives of gro-
wth and respect for the environment, experts believe they
have found the elixir in ecoefficiency, the cornerstone of
‘sustainable development.’ It is all about progressively redu-
cing the ecological impact and intensity of natural resour-
ces depletion up to a level considered compatible with the
planet’s acknowledged replenishing capacity.
It is unequivocal that ecoefficiency has improved dramati-
cally, but at the same time, the perpetuation of uncontrol-
led growth leads to global degradation.
NOTHING IS CREATED...
• The decrease in impacts and pollution per product unit
made is systematically invalidated by the multiplication of
units sold – a phenomenon called the ‘return effect’.
NOTHING IS LOST...
• The economic system is not a perpetual motion machine
that permanently feeds itself in a virtuous cycle with no losses.
On the contrary, it is a system that turns natural resources into
refuse that cannot be reused, as shown by Georgescu-Roegen
in his book The Entropy Law and the Economic Process.
After all, all indicators show that depletion keeps
growing [BONAIUTI, Mauro. Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen:
bioeconomia verso un’altra economia ecologicamente e
socialmente sostenible. (bioeconomics versus another
ecologically and socially sustainable economy) Torino:
Bollati Boringhieri, 2003].
EVERYTHING IS TRANSFORMED…
• ‘Dematerialization of the economy’ – by moving the
economic activity axis to the third sector, less demanding of
natural resources, especially of energy – turned out to be an
INTRO
illusion. According to Serge Latouche, this ‘new economy’
is, in fact, relatively immaterial or less material, but rather
than replacing the old economy with the new one, what we
find are complementary relationships between them.
In other words, we have broken the planet’s natural life
cycle and do not respect it anymore (See the four system
conditions at The Natural Step – tool 6.13 in ‘Knowledge
Management – Sustainability Compendium: Social and
Environmental Responsibility Management Tools’).
• There is no preservation of Nature’s potential for the
production of renewable resources (due to systematic
increases in concentrations of substances extracted from
the Earth’s crust by the society);
• There is no limit to the use of non-renewable resources;
• There is no respect for the capacity of natural cycles to
renew themselves (due to the increasing production and
concentration of harmful substances produced by the
society)
We do not intend to list here the mounting troubles, but it is not
by chance that humankind has seen for the first time in history
in a single decade so many gigantic world forums to assess
issues such as:
• The planet’s environmental depletion (Rio-92);
• Human rights scandals (Vienna-93);
• Demographic boom (Cairo-94);
• Social crisis, currently unsustainable (Copenhagen-95);
• The tragedy of women stuck in the trap of economic
transformations and family breakdown (Beijing-95);
• The global rural exodus that is leading to sprawling cities
(Istanbul-96).
The UN Human Development Report regards as obs-
cene the fortunes of a handful of just over four hundred
people in the world, who possess a fortune equivalent
to that of about half of the poorest population of the
planet. 2% alone hold half of the world’s wealth; the 50%
poorest account for only 1% of the planet’s wealth. This
wealth accumulation is considered as shameful as sla-
very and colonialism, with no place in a civilized society.
[DOWBOR, Ladislau. Gestão social e transformação da
sociedade (Social management and society transforma-
tion). In: DOWBOR, Ladislau and KILSZTAJN, Samuel.
Economia social no Brasil (Social Economy in Brazil). 1ª
ed. São Paulo: Senac, 2011, v.1, p. 17-42)
After some decades of uncontrolled misuse, it seems we
have reached a stormy zone – in the literal and figura-
tive sense... Climate changes are followed by oil wars,
which will be followed by water wars (SHIVA, Vandana.
La guerre de l’eau. Parangon, 2003), as well as by pande-
mics and essential flora and fauna species extinction as
a consequence of predictable biogenetic catastrophes.
The alternative left is to stick to the blind faith of ortho-
dox economists who believe the science of the future
will solve all problems and that unlimited replenishing
of nature is possible by artifice.
REFERENCE
Information from texts written by Serge Latouche and
Manfred Max Neef.
17
INTRO
The sustainable degrowth theory
Degrowth is an economic and political concept coined
in the 1970s – partially based on the theory of the Ro-
manian economist Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, crea-
tor of bioeconomics, published in his book The Entro-
py Law and the Economic Process (1971).
The degrowth theory is based on the hypothesis that
economic growth – understood as constant increase in
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) – is not sustainable for
the global ecosystem. This idea opposes the prevailing
economic thought according to which quality of life im-
provement derives from the GDP increase so that the
increase in production value should be a society’s per-
manent goal.
The main issue, according to degrowth advocates –
of whom Serge Latouche is the most prominent – is
that natural resources are finite. Therefore, there is no
infinite growth. Quality of life improvement must be
achieved with no consumption increase, but rather by
changing the dominant paradigm.
CRITICISM OF THE MAINSTREAM ECONOMIC
THOUGHT
According to its critics, the main consequences of pro-
ductivism – understood as the emphasis on growth and
productivity increase in industrial societies, whether
socialist or capitalist – would be:
• Depletion of energy resources (such as oil, gas, uranium,
coal, etc.) in the next century, if the current pace of
consumption increase is maintained;
• Increasing raw materials scarcity;
• Environmental degradation: greenhouse effect, global
warming, loss of biodiversity and pollution;
• Flora, fauna and human health degradation;
• Improvement in the standard of living in Northern
hemisphere countries at the expense of Southern countries
regarding transport, sanitation, food, etc.
Although productivism has been partially questioned
by sustainable development advocates, the criticism
of growth objectors is more radical, since they regard
sustainable development itself as an oxymoron1 – so-
mewhat of a contradiction. Development cannot be
(1) Oxymoron is a deliberate combination of two words that seem to mean the opposite of each other and make up a third concept to be understood at the reader’s discretion.
18
sustainable, once the permanent increase in goods
and services production also leads to an increase in
the consumption of natural resources, thus speeding
up their depletion – not to mention that 20% of the
world’s population already consumes 85% of the natu-
ral resources.
ASSUMPTIONS OF THE DEGROWTH THEORY
• The current economic system depends essentially on
non-renewable resources. Therefore, it cannot be perpetual.
Raw material reserves are limited, mainly regarding energy
sources, which goes against the GDP principle of unlimited
growth;
• There is no evidence that economic growth can be
separated from an increase in its environmental impact;
• Wealth produced by economic systems is not restricted to
goods and services. There are other forms of social wealth,
such as the ecosystems’ health, justice and good relations
among members of a society, the level of equity and the
democratic nature of institutions. The increase in material
wealth, measured solely by monetary indicators, can be
detrimental to other forms of wealth;
• By relying on superfluous consumption, Western societies
are usually unaware of progressive loss of other forms of
wealth, such as quality of life, and underestimate the
reaction of marginalized populations – as is the case of
suburban violence and resentment towards the West from
countries that do not have the same economic development
standard.
Sustainable degrowth theorists also believe that the
GDP is only a partial measure of wealth, and if we in-
tend to reestablish the whole range of possible forms
of wealth, we must stop using it as a compass. Alter-
natively, they suggest the use of indicators such as the
HDI, the ‘Ecological Footprint’ and the Social Health
Index (see the chapter on ‘Sustainability Indicators and
Indices of Nations’).
REFERENCE
www.decroissance.org
www.decroissance.info
www.degrowth.net
www.wikipedia.org.br http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/
P%C3%A1gina_principal

Characteristics of new indicators –
New reflections
‘We know that what is measured is done. If
there is no data, we will be only one more
person with one more opinion’
There is consensus that a sustainable development po-
licy can only be developed with indicators. New indi-
cators are needed to help companies, governments and
people to see the world more accurately so that the so-
cial usefulness of activities can be assessed. This is how
we can build a sound basis for political decisions and
the development of business strategies consistent with
the current state of the world – of scarcity and unsus-
tainability.
Hindrances to the creation of such indicators include
parameters for conceptualization, implementation and
monitoring of local, national or international systems.
There is still little done because the theme is new for the
academic community, and research and test results are
not available yet, since several works are underway or
simply undergoing a legitimization process.
It is also true that the current lack of objective know-
ledge about ecosystems prevents the creation of a deve-
lopment index that includes the environmental dimen-
sion. Well‑being is also hard to be measured, but the
fact is that, unless we adopt standardized and generally
accepted ways to measure our natural resources, the
well-being and the results of the social usefulness of our
activities, we will neither be able to devise nor assess
public and private policies.
It is time to reflect on and set new trends to meet sus-
tainability challenges. Building solutions towards sus-
tainable development requires that we face it from a
new perspective: What should be changed so we can
become economically, socially and environmentally
sustainable? What should be measured? How should it
be measured? What are the necessary indicators?
NEW PARAMETERS, NEW PARADIGMS
The proposal of new indicators aims to create a sta-
tistical basis to measure results of social and environ-
mental policies and of economic development policies.
Education and family values, popular culture, respect
for nature and sustainable exploration of resources, po-
verty and inequality reduction are some of the many
key aspects of ‘development’ not acknowledged by our
conventional indicators, which often lead us to inac-
curate diagnosis of poverty and development in areas
INTRO
of abundant natural resources and popular culture, for
instance.
Basically, these new indicators:
• Shall not be regarded as simple tools complementary to
the GDP, but rather an alternative to the GDP;
• Shall account for the urgent need for a better distribution
of the existing wealth and put an end to its undue
accumulation;
• Shall account for the negative effects of over-exploitation
of natural resources and degradation of life due to the
devastation caused by the trade of world public assets;
• Shall be devised as a way to measure progress of the
Human Rights.
The GDP has survived far longer than its usefulness!
WEALTH INDICATORS
The Human Development Index (HDI), devised by the
UNDP, was the first major initiative widely accepted by
the society. The HDI combines three basic indicators:
life expectancy, income and education level. Still, many
side effects of progress are not taken into account, such
as unemployment, crime rate increase, new health ne-
eds, environmental pollution and family breakdown,
among others.
Despite its importance for paving the way, it is no lon-
ger the most advanced tool in the area.
A growing number of countries have implemented the
Handbook of National Accounting: Integrated Environ-
mental and Economic Accounting 2003 (SEEA 2003). It
is a satellite system of the System of National Accounts.
It brings together economic and environmental infor-
mation in a common framework. http://unstats.un.org/
unsd/envAccounting/seea2003.pdf
In 2008, the Commission on the Measurement of Eco-
nomic Performance and Social Progress (CMDEPS), an
initiative of the French government, raised 28 propo-
sals (15 of which from international organizations and
13 from academia and national initiatives).
http://www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/documents/Survey_of_
Existing_Approaches_to_Measuring_Socio-Economic_ Pro-
gress.pdf
REFERENCE
Information gathered on the websites of France Libertes
Fondation Danielle Miterrand www.france-ibertes.fr and at
www.beyond-gdp.eu
19
INTRO
OECD AND UN
OECD AND SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS
To realize the dream of a better world, the OECD, with
the support of the Bank of Italy and the Joint Research
Centre (JRC) of the European Commission, gathered
in Rome a contingent of experts on the theme: ‘Is ha-
ppiness measurable and what do those measures mean
for policy?’ They discussed up to what extent life satis-
faction can affect economic models and governmental
action. Happiness is not a new idea. However, it is still
hard to be measured. This was also one of the objectives
of the OECD June 2007 Istanbul World Forum.
OECD begins with the following assertion: the society is
increasingly concerned with its quality of life. Therefo-
re, it is important to integrate, when measuring societal
progress, not only economic indicators like the GDP,
but also environmental and social concerns.
National per capita income is not enough. A clear
example is that, due to oil income, Republic of Equato-
rial Guinea has a per capita GDP similar to that of Gre-
ece, but the infant mortality rate is thirty-fold higher.
OECD intends to go beyond: it wants to assess the level of
happiness of a country’s population with the aid of more
elaborate indicators. And why not guide public policy
following this criterion? With this in mind, the OECD uses,
at an international level, indicators such as life expectancy,
infant mortality, obesity, public-private health expenditu-
re, youth inactivity, income inequality, prison population,
road network, road motor vehicles and road fatalities, as
well as tourism (hotel nights), recreation and culture.
20
REFERENCE
Text edited from LExpansion.com - Hugo Lattard.
Excerpt of the Istanbul Declaration
‘We are encouraged that initiatives to measure socie-
tal progress through statistical indicators have been
launched in several countries and on all continents.
Although these initiatives are based on different me-
thodologies, cultural and intellectual paradigms, and
degrees of involvement of key stakeholders, they re-
veal an emerging consensus on the need to undertake
the measurement of societal progress in every country,
going beyond conventional economic measures such as
GDP per capita. Indeed, the United Nation’s system of
indicators to measure progress towards the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) is a step in that direction.’
‘A culture of evidence-based decision making has to be
promoted at all levels to increase the welfare of societies.
And in the ‘information age,’ welfare depends in part on
transparent and accountable public policy making. The
availability of statistical indicators of economic, social,
and environmental outcomes and their dissemination to
citizens can contribute to promoting good governance
and the improvement of democratic processes. It can
strengthen citizens’ capacity to influence the goals of the
societies they live in through debate and consensus buil-
ding, and increase the accountability of public policies.’

UN AND SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS:
EARTH SUMMIT – RIO 1992 AND AGENDA 21
The United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development - UNCED (Earth Summit - 1992) raised
the need to develop indicators able to measure sustai-
nability, since the tools available, among which the GDP,
did not provide enough data for analysis.
The Conference’s resulting document, Agenda 21 –
chapter 40, highlights: ‘Commonly used indicators such
as the gross national product (GNP) and measurements
of individual resource or pollution flows do not provi-
de adequate indications of sustainability. Methods for
assessing interactions between different sectoral envi-
ronmental, demographic, social and developmental pa-
rameters are not sufficiently developed or applied. Indi-
cators of sustainable development need to be developed
to provide solid bases for decision-making at all levels
and to contribute to a self-regulating sustainability of in-
tegrated environment and development systems’ (Uni-
ted Nations, 1992).
Since the Agenda 21, 178 signatory countries have agre-
ed to correct distortions resulting from evaluations based
exclusively on the GDP. For this purpose, data on social
and environmental resources should be added and data on
predatory activities and wasteful use of resources should
be subtracted, among other distortions. Only then can
sustainability and development standards that include
economic, social, ethical and cultural aspects be defined.
The UN Commission on Sustainable Development
(CSD) was created in December 1992 at the United
Nations General Assembly meeting to ensure effective
follow-up to the UNCED.
It is responsible for monitoring and reporting on the im-
INTRO
plementation of the Agenda 21 and the Rio Decla-
ration on Environment and Development, as well
as the implementation of the agreements at the
local, national, regional and international levels re-
affirmed at the World Summit on Sustainable De-
velopment (WSSD), held in Johannesburg 10 years
later to evaluate the full implementation of Agenda
21 and the Commitments to the Rio principles.
The Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, (Chap-
ter X), and the Commission on Sustainable Deve-
lopment (CSD), at its 11th and 13th sessions, encou-
raged further work on indicators for sustainable
development by countries, in line with their spe-
cific conditions and priorities. CSD-13 invited the
international community to support efforts of de-
veloping countries in this regard.
The third, revised set of CSD indicators was finalized
in 2006 by a group of experts from developing and
developed countries and international organizations.
The revised edition contains 96 indicators, including
a subset of 50 core indicators. The guidelines (www.
un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/indicators/guidelines.
pdf) on indicators and their detailed methodology
sheets (www.un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/indicators/
methodology_ sheets.pdf) are now available as a re-
ference for all countries to develop national indica-
tors of sustainable development.
The CSD indicator set is based on the previous two
(1996 and 2001) editions, which have been develo-
ped, improved and extensively tested as part of the
implementation of the Work Programme on Indi-
cators of Sustainable Development.
21
INTRO
UN AND SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS: MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS (MDG)
AND GROSS NATIONAL HAPPINESS (GNH)
Bhutan’ good results made the UN consider its imple-
mentation in other countries. An International version
is being developed in Canada to be implemented this
year. According to Michael Pennock (Director of the
Population and Public Health Observatory at the Van-
couver Island Health Authority in Canada, who worked
on the development of the Genuine Progress Indicator
from Canada and is a UN consultant for the develop-
ment of the GNH indicators in Bhutan), the GDP me-
trics are too narrow as a well-being measure. ‘We must
rethink the way we measure progress. The GNH is more
comprehensive than the GDP and, differently from what
many would think, is based on scientific methods rather
than on philosophical or moral assumptions.’
Bhutan is among the few countries that have been making
good progress in achieving the Millennium Development
Goals. According to the latest report ‘Bhutan’s progress:
Midway to the Millennium Development Goals’
http://www.undp.org.bt/mdg/MDG_
Midway.pdf, which was launched in Thimphu in No-
vember 2208, Bhutan has already achieved three of the
MDG indicators and is on track to meet most of the
other targets by 2015.
In a keynote address at the launch, the UN Assistant Se-
cretary-General and Regional Director, UNDP, Mr. Ajay
Chhibber, said that Bhutan presents an exemplary case of
22
a peaceful political transformation from absolute monar-
chy to parliamentary democracy with a gradual set up of
democratic institutions and practices. He emphasized the
need to ‘deepen and strengthen democracy to the grass
root level and empower people’, which will not only help
achieve the MDGs but also strengthen the democratic
process. Mr. Chhibber highlighted the need for targeted
programs that will deliver development benefits directly
to the poor, enhancing their human development and
addressing the root causes of their impoverishment. Such
intervention, he said, will help address the contrasts across
districts on a number of MDG target areas such as poverty
incidence, child malnutrition, food security, net primary
education enrolment and access to safe drinking water.
Also speaking at the occasion, the UN Resident Coordina-
tor, Mr. Nicholas Rosellini, said that Bhutan’s success story
on the MDGs is attributed to the strong political will and
commitment of the Government in integrating the MDGs
into the national planning framework.  He highlighted the
synergy between Bhutan’s development approach of Gross
National Happiness and the Millennium Declaration, and
said that the ‘Millennium Declaration is guided by the uni-
versal values of freedom, equality, tolerance, respect for na-
ture and shared responsibilities – ideals which are integral
to Bhutan’s development approach of Gross National Ha-
ppiness’, which has helped pave the way for Bhutan’s pro-
gress in the MDGs.

UN AND SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS: HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX (HDI)
Since 1990, the UNDP Human Development Index has
been annually measured and published. Besides the
GDP, the HDI aggregates composite indices including
life expectancy and education level. The last ranking
places Norway first whereas the USA ranked 10th, 6 pla-
ces below the GDP per capita ranking. France ranked
16th.
‘The UN welcomes this indicator, says the economist
Flavio Comim, of the United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP). ‘There are many similarities be-
tween the GNH and the set of UN human development
indicators (such as the HDI - Human Development
Index). Both go beyond income (and GDP) as a well-
being measure. Both are concerned with the individual
and the multiple dimensions of well-being. Both respect
people’s autonomy as the ultimate expression of deve-
lopment.’
‘Nevertheless, the GNH presents some constraints inhe-
rent to subjective metrics. Happiness is an intuitive
concept common to all human beings, but its measu-
rement is prone to biases, often of psychological natu-
GNH AND THE WEST
GNH conceptual framework
The GNH was developed along three conferences – in
Bhutan, Canada and Thailand1 – that gathered empi-
ric economists and scientists to identify the main con-
ditioning factors of happiness, thus adopting a fully
scientific approach, and developing an evidence-based
framework. In other words, the GNH conceptual fra-
mework is not based on religious assumptions, but
rather on science and empiricism. As we, from the
Western world, seek better conceptual framework for
progress, we can now rely on the work done by the
Bhutanese.
International GNH version
An international version is underway. It is based on
the GNH conceptual framework, uses many of the
core items of the Bhutanese survey and incorporates
some lessons learned in a similar work carried out by
the GPI Atlantic (Genuine Progress Index) applied in
two Nova Scotia communities. This version can be
self-managed, is cross-cultural and takes only 20 – 30
minutes to be filled out.
INTRO
re. Maybe the most well known distortion, presented
by philosopher Isaiah Berlin in 1956, is the ‘preference
adaptation’. It says that people who endure long perio-
ds of deprivation develop defense mechanisms against
hardships. They learn how to be content with little.
They do not mind life is hard. When asked about life,
they minimize the problems and, as a rule, show a high
level of happiness.’
‘The problem lies in the fact that the GNH is not only
proposed as a measurement of well-being, but, like the
GDP, it is regarded as a guide to public policy. What
should we do about those extremely poor people who
say they are the happiest people in the world? Should
we neglect them? We know we cannot do that. We also
know that only a measure that shows the objective de-
privations endured by people can bring back a stand
that prioritizes human rights over frivolous preferences.’
‘The GNH is a good starting point, but not necessarily
the end. It has some good points that should be used so
we can have a better and more equitable measure of
well-being’, says Flavio Comim.
What do we need to do?
It is the beginning of a very exciting period. We must
develop:
• Tools that measure well-being or happiness at national,
regional and local levels, as well as their respective
conditioning factors;
• Public policy tools, such as ‘political lenses’, that can be
used to evaluate the impact on happiness, so that we can
be more competent in assuring that such policy will really
improve happiness; and
• International collaborators that can share knowledge and
promote the GNH within our jurisdictions. Some initiatives
are very interesting, but they are only ‘beginnings’ being
ignited worldwide. We need to work together to gain enough
momentum and keep this movement going ahead.
Excerpt from lecture given by Michael Pennock – Direc-
tor of the Population and Public Health Observatory at
the Vancouver Island Health Authority in Canada, who
worked on the development of the Genuine Progress In-
dex for Atlantic Canada, is a UN consultant in the develo-
pment of the GNH indicators in Bhutan and coordinator
of the GNH International version implementation.
(1) The fourth conference will be held in Brazil in November, 2009
23
INTRO
Need for GNH index
Across the world, indicators focus largely on market
transactions, covering trade, monetary exchange rates,
stockmarket, growth, etc. These dominant, conven-
tional indicators, generally related to Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) reflect quantity of physical output of a
society. GDP, along with a host of supporting indicators,
is the most widely used indicator. Yet GDP is heavily
biased towards increased production and consumption,
regardless of the necessity or desirability of such ou-
tputs, at the expense of other more holistic criterion. It
is biased against conservation since it does not register
conservation or stocks.
 Indicators determine policies. The almost universal use
of GDP-based indicators to measure progress has hel-
ped justify policies around the world that are based on
rapid material progress at the expense of environmental
preservation, cultures, and community cohesion.
Indicators embody values. In general, policy makers tend
to implement policies or programmes based on current
international development trends, without taking into
consideration the values that lie behind such trends.
One way to overcome this tendency is by recognizing
the fact that between values and policy implementation
stand indicators. Values, policies and programmes are
mediated by indicators.
Indicators capture the imagination and help convince
lay people about the direction of the country’s goals and
development objectives, but it is not always easy for the
people to discern that indicators are not value neutral,
and that values and principles underlie and determine
programmes and policies.
Indicators actually drive society in certain directions
and even determine the policy agendas of governments.
Not only decision makers, but ordinary citizens, tend to
take social or economic programmes at face-value, and
accept proposed policy implementation without exami-
ning the ultimate values underlying those programmes.
But indicators can help bridge that gap.
As many contemporary indicators of progress and de-
velopment do not reflect GNH adequately, the Royal
Government of Bhutan directed the Centre for Bhutan
Studies (CBS) to develop GNH index, which will provi-
de appropriate indicators for Bhutanese development.
The Centre for Bhutan Studies constructed a single
number index for Gross National Happiness that can be
broken down into individual component indicators that
are useful for different sectors for planning and techni-
cal purposes at the ministerial and departmental levels.
Although GNH is a complex concept and ideal, for prac-
tical application, GNH philosophy had to be translated
into a metric system. The government expressed the
need for GNH indicators because without some kind of
measurement system, GNH cannot guide practical po-
24
licies and programmes. Left at the level of inspirational
discourse, imprecision will allow many conventional in-
dicators to play unwitting roles in a GNH society.
GNH indicators are also needed to foster vision and a
sense of common purpose. Left at the plane of vision,
GNH cannot specify the practical programmes and re-
sources needed to attain those visions in quantitative
terms. In this respect, screening tools for projects and
policies developed by the Centre for Bhutan are expected
to used for selection of policies and programmes, which
are aligned with GNH. People clarify their vision by spe-
cifying targets and indicators that serve to point to areas
of weakness and strength. Indicators serve as convenient
instruments and yardsticks of evaluation over time.
GNH indicators can become tools of accountability. The
sense of common purpose embodied in a coherent set of
indicators enables ordinary men and women to more re-
adily judge, hold accountable their leaders, by checking
whether these the targets are being fulfilled. Without
a common vision concretized through indicators, each
individual merely looks to his or her own ends, even
though welfare is a shared pursuit. Not only do GNH
indicators assist in building vision, they are instrumental
to that vision being held in common by all citizens, buil-
ding a notion of greater interdependence across time
and over space.
Once people are familiar with GNH indicators, they can
have a practical effect on consumer and citizens’ beha-
viour. The behaviour changing function can emerge in
significant ways when there are appropriate indicators
that direct attention towards both the causes of proble-
ms and the manner in which behaviour and decisions can
prevent and solve those problems. This potential beha-
viour changing function of GNH indicators can be valu-
able. For example, certain indicators for GNH gauge the
prevalence rates of negative and positive emotions, from
compassion to anger. The level of trust, volunteerism and
safety can also be tracked. Information on their prevalen-
ce rates will influence peoples’ behaviour as they begin to
gauge their own traits against the national trends.
To qualify as a valid indicator of GNH, an indicator with
respect to any variable has to have either a positive or a
negative influence on well-being and happiness. The di-
rection of causality on happiness and well-being must be
clear. For examples, less crime, illness, and air pollution
have a more positive influence on happiness than more
crime, illness, and pollution.
GNH indicators include both objective and subjective
dimensions of life. The construction of an index should
give equal weight to both the functional aspects of hu-
man society as well as the emotive side of human expe-
rience. To give just one example, people’s perceptions
of their own safety and security are as important in de-
termining happiness as objective crime statistics. That
 INTRO

balance allows good representation of information be- an abstraction from reality, given that from a Buddhist
tween the objective and the subjective. view, they do not exist. What exists in a fundamental
way is relationality (as opposed to subject and object) at
When measuring objective conditions such as educa-
all levels, which can only be assessed by a broad range
tional and medical facilities, or room ratios etc., mea-
of social, economic, cultural, and environmental indi-
sure of the psychological or subjective experience that
cators. Seen in this way, happiness and well-being is
accompanies this condition is important. For example,
ultimately a way of being that is affected by and affects
a student attends a school that scores highly in the con-
relational quality, which changes in meaning over time
ventional educational statistics, but he/she subjectively
with deepening sensitivities to the world around us and
views the educational experience as entirely deficient—
with our understanding of what is important or valuable
the teachers might be oppressive, or the classroom ten-
for us and for all sentient beings.
se. In other words, the process of obtaining the edu-
cation, including the classroom experience, does not Dasho Karma Ura - Butan
promote a sense of well-being in the student, despite
the school’s apparent high objective performance. Self
reporting of experiences along with objective statistics
therefore provides a more accurate picture of well-being
than the objective statistics alone.
As indicators reflect values, and shape programmes,
they become a vital link in providing feed-back on the
effectiveness of existing policies and programmes and
‘feed-forward’ into programme implementation, there-
by allowing the values they embody to be infused into
policies and programmes in a broad based manner.
Thus, in the case of using GNH indicators as evaluative
tools, they can be used not only to check whether pro-
grammes are consistent with GNH indicators but also
to create conditions for a coherent, organic relationship
between professed values on the one hand and actual
policies, programmes and projects on the other. The
ramification of pursuing such an organic relationship
should be recognized for the polity of Bhutan as a who-
le: if it is done successfully, it means that the country’s
economic, political, social, environmental, cultural and
technological environments will be penetrated by GNH
values, and that there will be a natural coherence to the
country’s policies that reflect its cherished values.
At the same time, from a Bhutanese cultural perspective,
it must be understood that the subjective versus objective
distinction is merely a heuristic device that does not in any
fundamental sense represent what is basic to the nature of
reality. The interdependence of all things, and the non-abi-
ding self of everything, is a key concept. The conventional
subjective versus objective division is an abstraction from
what is actually inter-relational. For GNH indicators, this
cultural concept means that seeing everything as relatio-
nal is more useful than seeing them as separate categories.
In fact, happiness itself dwells in the experience of quality
of relationship. Thus, the various domains are not simply
separate conditions of happiness in and of themselves. Ra-
ther, it is the intimate inter-relationship among these do-
mains that is significant.
The GNH index construction aimed at a deeper repre-
sentation of well-being than conventional indicators.
The distinction between subjective and objective is but

25
 2
Indicators and Indices
Indicadores e Índices de Sustentabilidade de Nações

1. Bellagio Principles 28
2. IDH + IPH + IDG + MPG 30
3. GNH – Gross National Happiness 37
4. BIP 40 - Baromêtre des Inegalités et de la Pauvreté 40
5. BCN – Balanço Contábil das Nações 42
(Balance Sheet of Nations)
6. BS - Barometer of Sustainability 44
7. Calvert-Henderson Quality of Life Indicators 47
8. DNA Brasil 48
9. DS – Dashboard of Sustainability 51
10. EF – Ecological Footprint 54
11. EPI – Environmental Performance Index 57
12. ESI – Environmental Sustainability Index 60
13. EVI – Environmental Vulnerability Index 62
14. GPI – Genuine Progress Indicator (IPR) 64
15. GSI – World Bank’s Genuine Saving Indicator 66
16. HPI – Happy Planet Index 68
17. IDS – Indicadores de Desenvolvimento Sustentável IBGE 70
18. IEWB – Index of Economic Well-being 72
19. IPRS – Índice Paulista de RS (São Paulo State 74
Social Responsibility Index)
20. Isew – Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare 76
21. ISH – Index Social Health 78
22. LPI – Living Planet Index 79
23. RCI – Responsible Competitiveness Index 80
24. SF – Social Footprint 83
25. WN – The Well-being of Nations 85

26

Redefining Progress
What are we doing with our survival in this planet? What are we doing with our species?
Our (economic) thermometers no longer
allow an accurate reading. They are lite-
rally making us sicker. They are leading
us to the wrong direction. We must cor-
rect the route for the sake of our survival.
This distortion comes from the fact that
the generations and societies that pre-
ceded us did not have the same proble-
ms. Production was the key point. That
explains the GDP metrics, which was
exclusively focused on the monetary
amount produced in the post-war pe-
riod. In other words, the GDP was cre-
ated to be a measurement tool directly
determined by the cost of manufactu-
ring industry and the war.
Currently, due to the big environmental
and human challenges we face, we need
new thermometers that can help us
change our production and consump-
tion models, adjusting them to the natu-
ral resources available. It is a considera-
ble change in the way of life, a change in
attitudes regarding the structure and the
dimensions of a development model, as
well as more appropriate regulatory ins-
truments. It is no longer an alternative
activity, but a vital need.
The current financial crisis, which has
been shaking the world economy, shows
that our economic metrics are deficient.
We now have, therefore, a unique op-
portunity to change this situation. If we
want to be sustainable and have quality
of life, we need reliable indicators that
can lead us to this direction. After all,
what matters has to be measured, and
what is measured is manageable.
It is high time we reconsidered develo-
pment theories based solely on econo-
mics and restricted to the GDP concept.
We must rethink our wealth measure-
ment by including economic, social and
environmental sustainability, and even
happiness (quality of life / well-being).
Most experts agree that we need to
update our economic metrics, and they
are working in this direction. These stu-
dies are increasing in number and depth,
and the UN has been the main supporter
of this process, in an attempt to include
social and environmental variables in su-
ggested national accounting principles.
There is a large number of initiatives
that create “alternative economic in-
dicators” aimed at improving the GDP
metrics by incorporating, in most ca-
ses, new economic, environmental and
social sustainability measures into the
data, besides including happiness / qua-
lity of life assessment parameters.
The objective is to offer more com-
prehensive economic data that can be
more intelligible to the population and
more relevant to policy makers, by taking
into account factors like environmen-
tal degradation and quality of life, thus
changing our political priorities to build
more equitable and happy societies.
The biggest challenge is to reach a con-
sensus on the ways to assess and mea-
sure the objective – not the subjective –
perceptions of well-being, rating them,
as it was done in the HDI measures of
education, health and standards of li-
ving. We must raise the status of these
indicators to the level enjoyed by the
GDP today.
These are constraints currently faced
when trying to monetize public goo-
ds, such as water and air: exhaustion
of natural resources by predatory ex-
ploitation, environmental degradation
through pollutant production processes
(negative externalities that impact on
soil, air and water), etc. Such task is key
to planning a development that does not
focus only on the economic dimension.
Therefore, it is a question of trying to
show the interdependence of economic,
Intro 1
social and environmental variables in
the production and economic develop-
ment model adopted.
The trade/financial model that is spre-
ading around the world worsens ine-
qualities, threatens our survival and the
cohesion of our societies. Redesigning a
social, environmental and political pact
worldwide would mean changing our
vision and ways of thinking, rethinking
the wealth that will add true value to
life. Finally, a new accounting and new
statistics will allow a different reading to
our routes, in line with our social and
environmental challenges and self-des-
truction risks.
Nowadays, one of the clearest pieces
of evidence, provided by international
studies on future risks (global warming,
poverty, water scarcity…), is that it is
not a question of technical, monetary or
physical problems. It is all about politi-
cal choices.
And we are the ones to choose the poli-
ticians that will make these choices.
Tip
Global Directory to Indicator Initiatives.
Compendium of Sustainable Develop-
ment Indicator Initiatives is a worldwi-
de directory of sustainability indicators.
It is an initiative carried out by several
partners and donors, including the In-
ternational Institute for Sustainable De-
velopment (IISD), Environment Canada,
Redefining Progress, World Bank, and
the United Nations Division for Sustai-
nable Development.
27
 1 IISD
Bellagio
Principles
International Institute
for Sustainable
Development – IISD
COUNTRY
Canada
WHAT IT IS
Principles to measure and assess progress toward sustai-
nable development. These principles serve as guidelines
for the whole of the assessment process including the
choice and design of indicators, their interpretation and
communication of the result. They are interrelated and
should be applied as a complete set.
ORIGIN
These principles are the result of the work of an inter-
national group of measurement practitioners and rese-
archers from five continents gathered by the Interna-
tional Institute for Sustai¬nable Development – IISD
in 1996 at the Rockefeller Foundation’s Study and Con-
ference Center in Bellagio, Italy, aiming to synthesize
insights on the main aspects related to sustainability
assessment.
OBJECTIVE
The principles were developed both to start sustaina-
ble development assessment processes and to evaluate
existing processes in any institution, from local com-
munities and companies to international institutions.
CONTENT
TThere are 10 Bellagio principles, and they cover all
stages of the sustainability measurement indicators
development process. Principle 1 deals with the star-
ting point of any assessment - establishing a vision of
28
sustainable development and clear goals that provide
a practical definition of that vision in terms that are
meaningful for the decision-making unit in question.
Principles 2 through 5 include the content of any asses-
sment, Principles 6 through 8 deal with key issues of the
process of assessment, while Principles 9 and 10 deal
with the necessity for establishing a continuing capacity
for assessment.
The principles that guide the stages of the sustainable
development measurement process and their content
are as follows:
1. Guiding Vision and Goals
Assessment of progress toward sustainable develop-
ment should be guided by a clear vision of sustainable
development and goals that define that vision.
2. HOLISTIC PERSPECTIVE
Assessment of progress toward sustainable develop-
ment should:
• include review of the whole system as well as its parts;
• consider the well-being of social, ecological, and
economic sub-systems, their state as well as the direction
and rate of change of that state, of their component parts,
and the interaction between parts;
• consider both positive and negative consequences of
human activity, in a way that reflects the costs and benefits
for human and ecological systems, in monetary and non-
monetary terms.
3. ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS
Assessment of progress toward sustainable develop-
ment should:
• consider equity and disparity within the current population
and between present and future generations, dealing
with such concerns as resource use, over-consumption
and poverty, human rights, and access to services, as
appropriate;
• consider the ecological conditions on which life depends;
• consider economic development and other, non-market
activities that contribute to human/social well-being..
4. Adequate Scope
Assessment of progress toward sustainable develop-
ment should:
• adopt a time horizon long enough to capture both hu-
man and ecosystem time scales, thus responding to ne-
eds of future generations as well as the current ones to
short-term decision-making;
• define the space of study large enough to include not
only local but also long distance impacts on people and
ecosystems;

• build on historic and current conditions to anticipa-
te future conditions - where we want to go, where we
could go.
5. Practical Focus
Assessment of progress toward sustainable develop-
ment should be based on:
• an explicit set of categories or an organizing framework
that links vision and goals to indicators and assessment
criteria;
• a limited number of key issues for analysis;
• a limited number of indicators or indicator combinations
to provide a clearer signal of progress;
• standardizing measurement wherever possible to permit
comparison
• comparing indicator values to targets, reference values,
ranges, thresholds, or direction of trends, as appropriate.
6. Openness
Assessment of progress toward sustainable develop-
ment should:
• make the methods and data that are used accessible to all;
• make explicit all judgments, assumptions, and
uncertainties in data and interpretations.
7. Effective Communication
Assessment of progress toward sustainable develop-
ment should:
• be designed to address the needs of the audience and set
of users;
• draw from indicators and other tools that are stimulating
and serve to engage decision-makers;
• aim, from the outset, for simplicity in structure and use of
clear and plain language.
8. Broad Participation
Assessment of progress toward sustainable
development should:
• obtain broad representation of key grass-roots,
professional, technical; and social groups , including youth,
women, and indigenous people - to ensure recognition of
diverse and changing values;
• ensure the participation of decision-makers to secure a
firm link to adopted policies and resulting action.
9. Ongoing Assessment
Assessment of progress toward sustainable develop-
ment should:
• develop a capacity for repeated measurement to
IISD 1
determine trends;
• be iterative, adaptive, and responsive to change and
uncertainty because systems are complex and change
frequently;
• adjust goals, frameworks, and indicators as new insights
are gained;
• promote development of collective learning and feedback
to decision-making.
10. Institutional Capacity
Continuity of assessing progress toward sustainable de-
velopment should be assured by:
• clearly assigning responsibility and providing ongoing
support in the decision-making process;
• providing institutional capacity for data collection,
maintenance, and documentation;
• supporting development of local assessment capacity.
Source: Adapted from Brunvoll et al. (2002).
RESULTS
Even though everyone acknowledges the key role
played by indicators in measuring sustainable deve-
lopment, it is difficult to foresee any way to measure
sustainable development that is widely accepted and
complies with the ten Bellagio principles. In the words
of Universidade de São Paulo professor José Eli Veiga:
“Establishing these ten principles may have been too
high an aspiration. However, even if only the fifth cri-
terion is used as a reference point – Practical focus:
Assessments should be based on an explicit set of ca-
tegories that links vision and goals to indicators – one
must admit that there are still conceptual and opera-
tional differences and constraints preventing it from
being accomplished”.
José Eli Veiga USP.BR
REFERENCE
www.ead.fea.usp.br/Semead/9semead/resultado_semead/
trabalhosPDF/331.pdf
www.iisd.org/mesure/compendium
29
 2 HDI + HPI + GDI + GEM
HDI
UNDP
WHAT IT IS
The Human Development Index (HDI), introduced
by the United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP), is important because it combines three basic
indicators: life expectancy at birth, income and edu-
cation attainment. Despite being published for the
first time in 1990, the index was recalculated for the
previous years, as of 1975. The HDI has gradually be-
come a world reference.
ORIGIN
Since the 1990s, the UNDP has developed and disclo-
sed the HDI for 175 countries, aiming to express in
figures and solidify the idea of Human Development,
which is based on the premise that, besides the eco-
nomic dimension, other social, cultural and political
characteristics that influence the quality of human life
should be taken into account in order to measure the
progress of a population. Working for the UNDP, the
Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq (1934-1998) con-
ceived the report. It is currently published in dozens of
languages and in over 100 countries.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of the Human Development Index is to
offer a counterpart to a very popular index, the Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, which consi-
ders only the economic dimension of development.
Created by Mahbub ul Haq with the help of Indian
economist Amartya Sen, 1998 Nobel Prize winner
in Economics, the HDI intends to be a general, con-
cise measure of human development. It neither en-
compasses all aspects of development nor represents
30
people’s “happiness” nor shows the “best place in the
world to live in”. It is an important tool to compare life
conditions among countries. It is also used to develop
and guide social policy and programs.
CONTENT
The HDI is an index based on capabilities: everyone
should be able to enjoy a long and healthy life, acquire
knowledge and have access to resources necessary to
a decent standard of living.
Since long and healthy life, access to knowledge and
decent standard of living are not palpable things simi-
larly conceived everywhere, it is necessary to use indi-
cators that allow the expression of these life conditions.
• Life expectancy at birth - Life expectancy at birth –
number of years newborn babies can be expected to live
if prevailing patterns of mortality at the time of birth
were to stay the same throughout the child’s life.
Minimum value: 25 years
Maximum value: 85 years
• Adult literacy rate - is the percentage of people aged 15
and above who can, with understanding, both read and
write a short, simple statement on their everyday life.
Minimum value: 0%
Maximum value: 100%
• Combined gross enrolment ratio for primary, secondary
and tertiary education - measures the percentage of stu-
dents enrolled in the three education levels, regardless
of age, in relation to the total number of people in the
age group that officially corresponds to each one of the-
se education levels.
Minimum value: 0%
Maximum value: 100%
STEP BY STEP
Minimum and maximum values (goalposts) are chosen
for each underlying indicator.
These goalposts are fixed and are based on the indica-
tor behavior trends for the next 25 years. The difference
between the actual value observed and the minimum
value corresponds to the progress made by a society in
that specific indicator. The difference between the ma-
ximum and minimum values corresponds to the com-
plete pathway to be followed by a society in that specific
indicator.
 IDH + IPH + IDG + MPG 2
For each indicator the following index is calculated:
(actual value – minimum)
Index = -----------------------------------------------------
(maximum – minimum)
Determining the HDI is straightforward. It is a simple ave-
rage of the three dimensional indices that shows the path
followed by the society as compared to the path yet to be
followed for a certain indicator.
WEIGHTED AVERAGE
Three indices are, then, composed and all of them will
have the same weight (1/3) in HDI composition:
• Life Expectancy Index - exclusively composed by the
Life Expectancy at Birth indicator;
• Education Index - composed by the indicators “Adult
Literacy Rate”, with two-thirds weight, and Combined
Gross Enrollment Ratio for Primary, Secondary and Ter-
tiary Schools, with one-third weight;
• GDP Index - exclusively composed by the GDP per
capita* indicator.
Minimum value: 100 PPP US dollars.
Maximum value: 40 thousand PPP US dollars.
CALCULATION
All three dimensions/aspects of the HDI are equally
valuable and desirable. For this reason, all indices re-
presenting them have the same weight (1/3) in the HDI
composition.
Aggregation Method: The three indices are added, with
equal weight, and divided by 3.
The value of the indices ranges from 0 to 1. Therefore,
the HDI value also ranges from 0 to 1. The closer to 1
the HDI value is, the higher the human development
level of a city, region or country.
VALUES
Low human development: HDI lower than 0.5.
Medium human development: HDI between 0.5 and 0.8.
High human development: HDI higher than 0.8.
In order to complement the information on human de-
velopment in the world, the UNDP has developed other
indices besides the HDI:
(*) GDP per capita - total value of all final goods and services produced within a certain region or part of society (i.e. countries, states, cities)
divided by its total population.
HPI-1 – Human Poverty Index for developing countries
HPI-2 – Human Poverty Index for a group of select high-
income OECD countries
GDI – Gender-related Development Index
GEM – Gender Empowerment Measure
Note
The HPI-1 and the HPI-2 consider the same dimen-
sions of the HDI in their calculations – a long and
healthy life, access to knowledge, and a decent stan-
dard of living –, with the addition of another dimen-
sion: social exclusion.
RESULTS
It is a key index of the UN Millennium Development
Goals (http://www.pnud.org.br/odm/) and, in Brazil, it
has been used by the federal government and by the local
administrations: the Municipal Human Development
Index (IDH-M), which can be accessed at the Atlas do
Desenvolvimento Humano no Brasil (http://www.
pnud.org.br/atlas/), is an online database with social and
economic information on the 5,507 municipalities in the
country, the 26 states and the Federal District.
The IDH-M is developed in the same way as the HDI,
from the same dimensions: a long and healthy life, ac-
cess to knowledge, and a decent standard of living.
The indicators used in the IDH-M are not the same as
in the HDI:
• Longevity Index - Life expectancy at birth in the muni-
cipality indicator.
• Education Index - Adult literacy rate indicator, with two-
thirds weight, and Gross school attendance rate by muni-
cipality inhabitants indicator, with one-third weight.
• Income Index - Average family per capita income in the
municipality indicator.
HDI evolution in Brazil
Since 1990 – has risen 14 places among the 177 coun-
tries assessed;
2005 – ranked 65th (index = 0.792 or medium human
development);
2006 (November) – ranked 69th (index = 0.792; pre-
vious index = 0.788 ranking 68th);
31
 2 HDI + HPI + GDI + GEM

CRITICISM
Year HDI
HDI is still limited, for it does not take into account the
1975 0,643 so-called side effects of progress, such as unemploy-
1980 0,678 ment, crime, new illnesses, environmental pollution,
family breakdown, among others.
1985 0,691

1990 0,712 Quote

1995 0,738 I must admit I did not initially see much merit in the
HDI itself, which, as it happens, I was privileged to
2000 0,747
help devise. At first I had expressed to Mahbud ul Haq,
2001 0,75 the originator of the Human Development Report,
considerable skepticism about trying to focus on a cru-
2002 0,757
de index of this kind, attempting to catch in one simple
2003 0,778 number a complex reality about human development
and deprivation. (…) But after some initial hesitation,
2004 0,792
Mahbub persuaded himself that the dominance of
2005 0,802 GNP (an overused and oversold index that he wanted
to supplant) would not be broken by any set of tables.

Brazil’s HDI improved between 2003 and 2004, but the country’s position in the world ranking decreased from 68
to 69, coming after Belarus (former Byelorussia) in a list of 177 countries and territories, shows the 2006 Human
Development Report (HDR) published by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

Brazil’s HDI rose from 0.788 in 2003 to 0.792 in 2004, a result that keeps the country among the 83 nations with
medium human development (HDI between 0.500 and 0.799), outside, therefore, the group of 63 nations with high
human development, which has Norway on the top for the sixth year in a row (HDI of 0.965). The data obtained
from the improved methodology indicate that, between 2003 and 2004, Brazil advanced in two of the three dimen-
sions of the Human Development Index (longevity and income) and remained the same in one (education).

In the ranking, Brazil comes right below the Caribbean island Dominica (0.793) and right above Colombia (0.790);
13 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have a better performance than Brazil, among which Mexico
(ranked 53, with an HDI of 0.821), Cuba (ranked 50, with an HDI of 0.826), Uruguay (ranked 43, with an HDI of
0.851), Chile (ranked 38, with an HDI of 0.859) and Argentina (ranked 36, with an HDI of 0.863). Other 17 nations
of the region rank below Brazil, such as Venezuela (ranked 72, with an HDI of 0.784), Peru (ranked 82, with an HDI
of 0.767), Paraguay (ranked 91, with an HDI of 0.757), Jamaica (ranked 104, with an HDI of 0.724), and Haiti, the
worst in Latin America and the Caribbean (ranked 154, with an HDI of 0.482). The lowest index in the world is
Niger’s (ranked 177, with an HDI of 0.311), in Africa.

Another indicator derived from the HDI is the Gender-related Development Index (GDI), which measures achie-
vement in the same basic capabilities as the HDI does, but takes note of inequality in achievement between women
and men. In the ranking with 136 countries, Brazil comes in 55, just before Colombia (56) and Oman (57), and right
after Macedonia (54) and Mauritius (53). Like in the HDI list, Norway is the leader and Niger the last country in
the GDI.

http://www.pnud.org.br/pobreza_desigualdade/reportagens/index.php?id01=2388&lay=pde

32
 IDH + IPH + IDG + MPG 1.3
People would look at them respectfully, he argued, but
when it came to using a summary measure of develop-
ment, they would still go back to the unadorned GNP,
because it was crude but convenient. (…) Mahbub got
this exactly right, I have to admit, and I am very glad
that we did not manage to deflect him from seeking a
crude measure. By skilful use of the attracting power of
the HDI, Mahbub got readers to take an involved inte-
rest in the large class of systematic tables and detailed
critical analyses presented in the Human Development
Report.
Amartya Sen, 1998 Nobel Laureate in Economics, in
the foreword to the 1999 HDR.
REFERENCE
Ranking de municípios no Brasil
www.pnud.org.br
www.pnud.org.br/idh/
www.pnud.org.br/atlas/ranking/IDH-M%2091%2000%20R
anking%20decrescente%20(pelos%20dados%20de%202
000).htm
Human development report 2005
hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2005/pdf/presskit/HDR05_PKE_
HDI.pdf
HDI around the world: dark green shows the highest indices (>0.9); brown, the lowest (<0.3).
2
THE ENVIRONMENTAL HDI
If the UN started to build the environmental variable into
the annual assessment made by the UNDP, a sort of ro-
tation of nations would occur. The United States would
plummet in the ranking, whereas Brazil would climb some
steps. The Environmental HDI, a hybrid index calculated
by the BNDES technicians, is a combination of the indica-
tors that comprise the HDI and the variables of the Envi-
ronmental Sustainability Index (ESI). In the Environmen-
tal HDI ranking, Brazil goes up from the 54th to the 39th
place. Biggest world polluters, the United States, in turn,
plummet from the eighth place in the traditional HDI to
the 15th position in the Environmental HDI. Emerging
power China ranks 129th in the environmental indicator.
Source:
O Globo, Mar 25, 2007, Financial news, pages 33 and 34.
In order to complement the information on hu-
man development in the world, the UNDP has
developed other indices besides the HDI:
• HPI-1 – Human Poverty Index for developing
countries
• HPI-2 – Human Poverty Index for a group of select
high-income OECD countries
• GDI – Gender-related Development Index
• GEM – Gender Empowerment Measure
33
 2 HDI + HPI + GDI + GEM
Human
Poverty Index
WHAT IT IS
The Human Poverty Index – HPI measures depriva-
tion in the three essential elements of human life: ex-
pected to die before age 40, the percentage of adults
who are illiterate and deprivation in overall economic
provisioning, reflected by the percentage of people
without access to health services and safe water and
the percentage of underweight children under five.
ORIGIN
Indicator derived from the HDI and published since
1997 by the UNDP.
OBJECTIVE
The HPI measures deprivation in human development.
Therefore, while the HDI measures overall progress in a
country in achieving human development, the human
poverty index (HPI) reflects the distribution of progress
and measures the backlog of deprivations that still exists.
The HPI is conceived for developing countries (HPI-1)
and for developed countries (HPI-2). A separate index
was developed for industrialized countries because hu-
man deprivation varies with the social and economic
conditions of the community, and in order to take ad-
vantage of high data availability in these countries.
34
CONTENT
The HPI-1 and the HPI-2 make use of the same di-
mensions as the HDI in their calculations, and one
additional dimension for the HPI-2: social exclusion,
reflected by the long-term unemployment rate.
The HPI-1 measures deprivation in the same dimen-
sions of basic human development as the HDI.
The variables used are:
• Long and healthy life. Percentage of people not expected to
survive to age 40;
• Knowledge. Percentage of adults who are illiterate; and
• Decent standard of living. Deprivation in overall economic
provisioning – public and private – reflected by the percentage
of people without access to health services and safe water and
the percentage of underweight children.
The HPI-2 focuses on deprivation in the same three di-
mensions as the HPI-1.
The variables are:
• Long and healthy life. Percentage of people not expected to
survive to age 60;
• Knowledge. Percentage of people whose ability to read and
write is far from adequate; and
• Decent standard of living. Proportion of people with
disposable incomes of less than 50% of the median.
• Social Exclusion: Proportion of long-term unemployed (12
months or more).
RESULTS
Developing countries:
In the Human Poverty Index (HPI), calculated only for
developing countries, Brazil ranked 20th out of 103
countries and territories.
Uruguay is the highest scoring country, and Niger is the
lowest.
This indicator measures deprivation in three aspects:
• Short life (represented by the probability of not surviving
to age 40);
• Lack of basic education (measured by the percentage of
adults who are illiterate);
• Lack of access to public and private resources (measured
by the unweighted average of the percentage of the
population without access to safe water and the percentage
of underweight children for their age).
 HDI + HPI + GDI + GEM 2
The better the position in this ranking, the lower the hu-
man poverty presented by the country or territory.
NOTE: Due to the lack of data from developing coun-
tries, the HPI measures only 78 countries.
Developed countries:
Despite having one of the highest per capita incomes
in the world, the United States has the worst human
poverty index among the rich countries. The result
of the study shows that Sweden is the country that
has evolved the most in this aspect, coming before
Norway, Finland, the Netherlands, Denmark, Ger-
many, Luxembourg, France, Spain and Japan. Italy
ranks 11th, followed by Canada, Belgium, Australia,
United Kingdom, Ireland, and the United States, whi-
ch ranked 17th.
The UNDP notes that Sweden, despite a lower per capi-
ta income than the United States, has, on average, more
adults who are functionally literate and fewer living in
poverty. According to the statistics, 7.5% of the Swedish
population between 16 and 65 is functionally illiterate,
whereas in the United States this figure is over 20%. In
Sweden, 6.3% of the population lives below the poverty
line (with US$ 11 per day, which is the reference point
for this group of countries), whereas in the United Sta-
tes this figure reaches 13.6%.
REFERENCE
www.pnud.org.br
http://www.dhnet.org.br
Equality between men and women is an
important part of human progress, but this is
neither reflected in the Human Development
Index nor in the Human Poverty Index.
Gender inequalities are measured in the
Gender-related Development Index (GDI) and
in the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM).
The Gender-related Development Index (GDI)
measures achievement in the same basic capabilities
as the HDI does, but takes note of inequality in
achievement between women and men. The greater
the gender disparity in basic capabilities, the lower
a country’s GDI compared with its HDI. The GDI is
simply the HDI discounted, or adjusted downwards,
for gender inequality.
In a ranking with 140 countries, Brazil ranks 52nd,
just before Belarus (53) and Mauritius (54), and right
after Romania (51) and Malaysia (50). However, as the
HDI ranking has 177 countries, if we add the coun-
tries that would come before Brazil in the HDI list to
the GDI list, the country ranks 64, that is, only one
position below its position in the HDI ranking. That
shows a virtual gender equality in the country (wo-
men live longer and have more education, but lower
income reduces living conditions for them). As well as
in the HDI list, Norway tops the GDI list and Niger is
at the bottom.
The Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) evalu-
ates progress in advancing women’s standing in poli-
tical and economic forums. It examines the extent to
which women and men are able to actively participate
in economic and political life and take part in decision-
making. It verifies the number of seats in parliament
held by women, number of female legislators, senior
officials and managers, and female professionals and
technical workers. It also includes the gender disparity
in earned income, reflecting economic independence.
The nordic countries and the Netherlands top the GEM,
while countries in the Arabian region are among those
with the lowest ranking. High income does not ensure
gender equality: when it comes to GEM, Japan ranks be-
low the Philippines and Botswana.
35
 2 HDI + HPI + GDI + GEM

TECHNICAL NOTE 1
CALCULATING THE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDICES

The diagrams here summarize how the five human development indices used in the Human Development
Report are constructed, highlighting both their similarities and their differences. The text on the following
pages provides a detailed explanation.

DIMENSION A long and A decent standard

HDI healthy life Knowledge of living
Life expectancy Adult literacy rate Gross enrolment ratio GDP per capita
INDICATOR at birth (GER) (PPP US$)
Adult literacy index GER index

DIMENSION Life expectancy Education index GDP index

INDEX index

Human development index (HDI)

DIMENSION A long and

HPI-1 healthy life Knowledge A decent standard of living
Probality at birth of Adult iliteracy rate Percentage of population Percentage of children
INDICATOR not surviving not using an improved under weight-for-age
to age 40 water source

Deprivation in a decent
standard of living

Human poverty index

for developing countries (HPI-1)

DIMENSION A long and A decent Social

HPI-2 healthy life Knowledge standard of living exclusion
Probality at birth of Percentage of adults Percentage of people living Long-term
INDICATOR not surviving lacking functional below the poverty line unemployment rate
to age 60 literacy skills

Human poverty index

for selected OECD countries (HPI-2)

DIMENSION A long and A decent standard

GDI healthy life Knowledge of living
Female life Male life Female adult Male adult Female estimated Male estimated
INDICATOR expectancy expectancy literacy rate Female literacy rate Male earned income earned income
at birth at birth GER GER

Female life Male life Female Male Female Male

DIMENSION expectancy expectancy education education income index income index
INDEX index index index index

EQUALLY Equaly Equally distributed

DISTRIBUTED distributed life education index Equaly distributed
INDEX expectancy index income index

Gender-related development index (GDI)

DIMENSION Political participation Economic participation Power over

GEM and decision-making and decision-making economic resources
Female and male shares Female and male Female and Female and male
INDICATOR of parliamentary seats shares of positions male shares of estimated earned
as legislators, senior professional and income
officials and managers technical positions

EQUALLY EDEP for EDEP for economic EDEP for income

DISTRIBUTED parliamentary participation
EQUIVALENT representatition
PERCENTAGE
(EDEP) Gender empowerment measure (GEM)

36

GNH – Gross
National Happiness
The Centre for
Bhutan studies
COUNTRY
Bhutan
WHAT IT IS
GNH indicators serve as evaluative tools to track de-
velopmental progress over time. GNH indicators as
targets display a common sense of purpose, offering us
direction to the programs and policies which are cohe-
rent with the values of GNH.
The Gross National Happiness index is generated to re-
flect the happiness and general well-being of the Bhuta-
nese population more accurately and profoundly than
a monetary measure. The measure will inform both
the Bhutanese people and the wider world about the
current levels of human fulfillment in Bhutan and how
these vary across districts and across time, and will also
inform government policy.
How do we identify who is happy?
The Bhutanese understandings of happiness are much
broader than those that are referred to as “happiness” in
the Western literature. The GNH takes what is known as
the ‘union’ approach to identification in the literature on
multidimensional measurement. A person who has achie-
ved sufficiency in all 9 dimensions is considered happy.
ORIGIN
“Gross National Happiness is more important than
Gross Domestic Product” was coined by His Majesty
the 4th King of Bhutan – Jigme Singye Wangchuck HM
– (in the 1970s), who is the author of GNH.
Coinciding with the coronation of the 5th King of Bhu-
tan, His Majesty Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck,
in November 2008, the Royal Government of Bhutan
has adopted the GNH index. In December 2006 he
proclaimed that fulfilling the vision of GNH would be
one of the four main responsibilities of his reign. His
GNH 3
Majesty King Khesar underlined that the ultimate goal
for social, economic, political changes in Bhutan is the
fulfillment of GNH.
The constitution of Bhutan describes the state and the
government as having responsibilities to pursue GNH.
GNH should become a serious arbitrator of public po-
licies and plans.
Finally, the GNH index was developed by the Centre for
Bhutan Studies, a non-aligned and non-profit research
institution based in Thimphu, Bhutan
OBJECTIVE
GIH aims to connect the international efforts which are
taking place in the field of developing alternative deve-
lopment indicators, human economics and happiness
psychology, so that individual efforts can benefit from
each other and that collectively these efforts can more
strongly impact on the international development agenda.
CONTENT
The GNH comprises 72 indicators that cover nine di-
mensions considered as the main components of happi-
ness and wellbeing in Bhutan. The nine dimensions are
equally weighted. Within each dimension, the indica-
tors are equally weighted, but since each dimension has
a different number of indicators, they can take different
weights when calculating the overall measurement.
The nine dimensions are:
1. Psychological wellbeing
2. Time use
3. Community vitality
4. Culture
5. Health
6. Education
7. Ecology
8. Living standards
9. Good governance
In this perspective ‘happiness’ comprises having suffi-
cient achievements in each of the nine dimensions.
1. Psychological Wellbeing Indicators
1 General health questionnaire
2 Frequency of prayer recitation
3 Frequency of meditation
4 Taking account of karma in daily life
5 Frequency of feeling of selfishness
6 Frequency of feeling of jealousy
7 Frequency of feeling of calmness
8 Frequency of feeling of compassion
37
 3 GNH

9 Frequency of feeling of generosity 7 Difficulty in contributing to community festivals

10 Frequency of feeling of frustration 8 Postponement of urgent repairs and maintenance of house
11 Occurrence of suicidal thought 7.Time Use Indicators
2. Ecology Indicators 1 Total working hours
1 Pollution of rivers 2 Sleep hours
2 Soil erosion 8. Community Vitality Indicators
3 Method of waste disposal 1 Sense of trust in neighbors
4 Names and species of plants and animals 2 Neighbors helping each other in the community
5 Tree plantations around your farm or house 3 Labor exchange with community members
3. Health Indicators 4 Socializing with friends
1 Self reported health status 5 Members of your family really care about each other
2 Long term disability 6 You wish you were not part of your family
3 Number of healthy days in the past 30 days 7 Members of your family argue too much
4 Body Mass Index 8 There is a lot of understanding in your family
5 Knowledge of transmission of HIV/AIDS virus 9 Your family is a real source of comfort to you
6 Duration for a child to be breast fed only 10 No. of relatives living in the same community
7 Walking distance to health care center 11 Victim of crime
12 Feelings of safety from human harm
4. ducation Indicators
13 Sense of enmity in the community
1 Level of education
14 No. of days volunteered
2 Literacy rate
15 Amount of donation in cash value
3 Ability to understand Lozey (Dzongkha language)
16 Availability of social support
4 Historical literacy (Knowledge on local legend and folk
stories) 9. Good Governance Indicators
5. Cultural Indicators 1 Performance of central government in reducing income gap
1 Speaking first language 2 Performance of central government in fighting corruption
2 Frequency of playing traditional games 3 Right to freedom of speech and opinion
3 Zorig chusum skills 4 Non-discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion,
language, politics or other status
4 Teaching children importance of discipline
5 Trust in central ministries
5 How important is it for children to learn to be impartial
towards rich, poor, different status, etc. 6 Trust in dzongkhag administration1
6 Knowledge of mask and other dances performed in 7 Trust in media
tshechus
(1) Wangdue Phodrang, Thimphu, Haa, Tsirang, Zhemgang, Samdrup Jongkhat,
7 Importance of reciprocity as a life principle Tashi Yangste, Samtse, Pemagatshel, Dagana, Gasa and Tashigang.
8 Attitude towards killing
9 Attitude towards stealing STEP BY STEP
10 Attitude towards lying The Gross National Happiness Index (GNH) is construc-
11 Attitude towards sexual misconduct ted in 2 steps: identification and aggregation.
12 No. of days spent in a year attending community • Identification: The first step is to define whether each
festivals household has attained sufficiency in each of the nine
dimensions. This is done by applying a sufficiency cutoff
6. Living Standards Indicators to each dimension. The fact that it may be difficult to set
1 Household income an exact cutoff should not obscure the reasonableness of
setting some sufficiency cutoff.
2 Income sufficiency to meet everyday needs
• Aggregation: The second step is to aggregate to the data
3 Food insecurity of the population a decomposable measure that is sensitive
4 House ownership to the ‘depth’ as well as ‘severity’ of achievements.
5 Room ratio Having calculated the indices in the nine dimensions,
6 Purchase of second hand clothes it is time to calculate the number of people who have

38

not reached cutoff in each indicator, divided by the
number of deprivations pointed out by the popula-
tion. This number shows the percentage contribution
to the lack of happiness.
The GNH can be used as an instrument of policy, and
can capture a great deal of interconnected information.
It is compared:
• in different districts surveyed.
• across time to see if GNH is decreasing or increasing after
we conduct future surveys.
• by gender, by occupation, by age group etc., to see how
shortfalls in GNH vary across disaggregated levels. This
information reveals immediately in what dimensions of life
shortfalls from sufficiency are most acute.
• by dimension, monitoring GNH decomposition to decrease
any dimension, if necessary.
• severity of deprivations, to identify whether the gap below
TIP: the Gross International Happiness Project (“gih”)
WHAT IT IS
The Gross International Happiness Project (‘GIH’) is based on the insight that
conventional development concepts such as GNP and Per Capita Income do
not properly reflect the general well-being of the inhabitants of a nation. In
order to develop real progress and sustainability and to effectively combat tren-
ds which compromise the planet’s natural and human ecosystems, GIH aims
to develop more appropriate and inclusive indicators which truly measure the
quality of life within nations and organizations.
ORIGIN
GIH is inspired by the concept of Gross National Happiness (GNH) propo-
sed by the King of Bhutan, which puts the well-being of individuals on top
of the national development agenda. Rooted in Buddhist philosophy and
values, GIH presents a radically different development paradigm, but one
that holds a promise for achieving real sustainability.
OBJECTIVE
GIH aims to connect the international efforts which are taking place in the
field of developing alternative development indicators, human economics
and happiness psychology, so that individual efforts can benefit from each
other and that collectively these efforts can more strongly impact on the
international development agenda.
CONTENT
The GIH Project consists of a series of conferences, seminars, researches
and publications around the world. The first meeting will be held in Bhutan
(February 2004), followed by conferences in Mongolia (July 2004) and the
Netherlands (2005).
STEP BY STEP
The GIH Project is guided by a select group of experts, forming a Task For-
ce. The GIH Project draws on the best practices of the growing number of
GNH 3
the sufficiency cutoff is deepening or narrowing across time.
Methodology > http://grossnationalhappiness.com/
screeningTools/screeningTools.aspx
RESULTS
Here are some of the conclusions of GNH in Bhutan:
• Men are usually happier than women.
• Among the 12 Dzonkhags, the happiest are Wangdue
Phodrang and Thimphu, and the least happy are Gasa and
Tashigang.
• Out of the nine dimensions, “time use” and “good
governance” had the higher frequency.
Referência
www.grossinternationalhappiness.org
countries and companies that have started to implement sustainability and
corporate social responsibility, while collecting international research and
practices around sustainable development indicators, which account for en-
vironmental and social values. The concept of GNH is meant to incorporate
these values, yet it also transcends them by including values reflecting gene-
ral well-being over a longer time horizon. A possible GNH Index could beco-
me the next level of innovation of indices, improving upon those measuring
environmental and social values.
The GIH Project is a collaboration by the following institutions:
• Bhutan Sustainable Development Secretariat (SDS) and Center of
Bhutan Studies, Bhutan
• Spirit in Business, USA and the Netherlands
• Social Venture Network Asia, Thailand
• ICONS, Redefining Progress & Implementing New Indicators on
Sustainable Development, Brazil
• Inner Asia Center for Sustainable Development, the Netherlands
• The Government of Mongolia
• The Values Center, USA
• Society for Ecology and Culture, UK and Ladakh, India
• Genuine Progress Indicators, GPI Atlantic, Canada
• New Economics Foundation, UK
Referência
www.grossinternationalhappiness.org
Book: First GNH Conference in Bhutan
This seminar is the first national initiative on exchanging ideas
deriving from various areas and sectors.
www.grossinternationalhappiness.org/downloads/Book-GNH-I-1.pdf
Report on the GNH Conference, held February 18-20, 2004 in Bhutan.
An international project on research and dialogue aimed at developing
policy and indicators focused on true values, sustainable development
and well-being for nations and organizations.
www.grossinternationalhappiness.org/downloads/GIH_report_18-2-04.doc
39
 4 BIP 40

Bip 40 – Inequity
4. Education (5 indicators)
5. Housing (5 indicators)

and Poverty Barometer 6. Justice (4 indicators)

EMPLOYMENT INDEX
• working conditions index;
Network of Warning about • unemployment index;

Inequality and Poverty • precariousness index; and

• professional relations index.

INCOME INDEX
• wages index;
• consumption index;
• income and tax inequalities index; and
• poverty index.

HEALTH INDEX
• life expectancy at birth;
• life expectancy gap between executives and workers;
• rate of health expenditure in the GDP;
COUNTRY • rate of health expenditure borne by families; and
• disparity of regional medical expenses.
France.
EDUCATION INDEX
WHAT IT IS
• access to course completion;
Combined indicator of inequalities and poverty. • dropout;
• inequalities in the French language level;
ORIGIN • inequalities in the Mathematics level; and
Disclosed in 2002 by the Network of Warning about • proportion of children of executives to children of
Inequality and Poverty. workers in college entrance exams.

OBJECTIVE HOUSING INDEX

Encompassing several dimensions of inequalities and
poverty, building one indicator for each dimension
(being this indicator itself a result of several indica-
tors) so that the evolution of corresponding inequali-
ties can be monitored along time, and, finally, consoli-
dating (or aggregating) these indicators so as to reach
a global index.
• weight of housing expenditure in families’ overall
consumption;
• property rental price index to consumer price index;
• percentage of housing finance;
• rate of housing allowance in housing overall
expenditure; and
• number of legal claims of landlords for not receiving the
rents.

CONTENT
JUSTICE INDEX
There are six dimensions (58 indicators):
• rate of imprisonment,
1. Employment and work (24 indicators broken into • rate of pre-trial detention,
four categories)
• percentage of prisoners convicted to over 5 year of
2. Income (15 indicators broken into four categories) imprisonment, and
3. Health (5 indicators) • rate of grant of refugee status

40
 BIP 40 4 1.6

STEP BY STEP RESULTS

The indicator is built in two steps. The first step con- For the third year straight, inequalities and poverty
sists of grading each indicator 0-10. The lowest value increased in France in 2004. After a reduction in 2000
observed in the period is given a 0, whereas the highest and 2001, inequalities rose again in 2002, especially af-
value is given a 10. An increase in the index will mean ter the summer of 2003, and continued to increase in
the inequality or poverty has become worse. 2004, year in which inequalities have reached its peak
The second step consists of giving different weights to in 20 years
the six dimensions. Bip 40 gives more importance to
income and employment indices, each of them with Referência
one-fourth weight, whereas the other indices are given www.bip40.org
one-eighth weight.
The weighted addition of these indicators produces an
index that translates the trend in the evolution of ine-
qualities and poverty observed year on year.
It is possible to calculate your Bip 40 by making your
own weighting system.
www.bip40.org/bip40_2003.xls

BIP 40
Evolution of the Inequity and Poverty Barometer as of 1983
6,00

5,50

5,00

4,50

4,00

3,50

3,00

1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003

41
 5 BCN
Balance Sheet
of Nations
WHAT IT IS
The Balance Sheet of Nations is a methodology for fi-
nancial reporting of countries or regions through the
inquired balance sheet method and the basic accoun-
ting equation:
assets minus liabilities equals equity, consisting of phy-
sical (forest resources) and financial data.
ORIGIN
The model was created by a group formed by resear-
chers of the Department of Accounting and Actuaries
of the University of São Paulo School of Economics,
Business Administration and Accountancy, the Yoko
Civilization Research Institute (YCRI), the USP En-
vironmental Science Graduate Program (PROCAM/
USP), and the USP Energy and Nuclear Research Insti-
tute (IPEN/USP).
OBJECTIVE
The Balance Sheet of Nations aims to unveil the burden
that each citizen will have to bear as a result of the glo-
bal climate change and global warming due to increased
greenhouse gas (GHG) concentration. It shows supera-
vit or deficit scenarios and allows for individual and col-
lective reflections on global, regional and local actions
related to environmental preservation mechanisms.
CONTENT
The Environmental Balance Sheet of each country
has its assets represented by its forest resources. The
42
liabilities correspond to environmental preservation
ones, and the equity means the residual part designed
to reestablish the natural reservations for the current
and future generations.
Assets are monetarily assessed (US$), adopting as op-
portunity cost the gross domestic product - purchasing
power parity (GDP-ppp), adjusted by the average ener-
gy consumption in tons of oil equivalent (TOE). Equity
is measured by the residual balance of carbon (CO2)
emissions minus sequestration for each country or re-
gion, calculated based on the expected cost of carbon
sequestration and on the scenarios forecast in IPCC’s
Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES). Liabili-
ties are determined by equivalence. The rationale for
the criteria adopted is the following:
GDP-ppp: Represents the monetary value of all final
goods and services produced within a nation, and,
therefore was defined as assets assessment parameter.
The purchasing power parity (ppp) method is adopted
by the UN and the World Bank and allows for a better
comparability between countries. Due to the limita-
tions of this economic growth measurement, its adjust-
ment by energy consumption was suggested.
Average energy consumption (in TOE): It is directly
related to GHG emissions, especially CO2 ones, and
the level of economic and social development of the
countries. It is unevenly distributed, as follows: the
world average (1.69 TOE), USA (8.45), Germany (4.2),
Japan (4.05), Russia (3.5), Brazil (1.09), China (0.66),
India (0.32), Bangladesh (0.15). It means that, to ge-
nerate the same amount of $ in a given country, CO2
emissions and environmental degradation are uneven.
In countries where this consumption is lower than
one TOE, illiteracy, infant mortality, and fertility ra-
tes are high, whereas life expectancy and the human
development index (HDI) are low. Therefore, despite
the urgent need for reducing energy consumption, it
is critical that poor countries surpass the 1 TOE level
(GOLDEMBERG, 2007).
CO2 residual balance: Forest carbon stocks contained
in the soil biomass and organic compounds represent
deposits of carbon avoided in the atmosphere and have
been converted into Million Tons of Carbon (MtC),
according to the areas of biomes of each country and
respective stock levels suggested by IPCC (2000). The
residual balance is determined by subtracting the
amount of accumulated carbon emissions, according
to the various combinations of IPCC SRES’s A1B1 and
A2B2 scenarios for 2050, covering deforestation, use of
technologies, and compliance with the Kyoto Protocol.
 BCN 5

STEP BY STEP
The basic procedures to determine the Balance Sheet of
Nations of a given country or region are the following:
1. Collecting data: gross domestic product (GDP ppp),
average annual energy consumption (TOE), number of
inhabitants, forest area of biomass and organic compounds,
carbon stock levels, and cost suggested by the UN of the
avoided carbon.
2. Measuring the Environmental Assets: determining the per
capita GDP-ppp by the number of inhabitants and dividing it
by the average energy consumption (in TOE).
3. Measuring the Environmental Equity: determining
the residual carbon balance obtained by subtracting the
estimated carbon emissions in the scenarios created by
IPCC from the balance in stock (forest area times the carbon
sequestration rate). Finally, the balance in MtC is converted
into $ using the cost suggested in the UN reports.
4. Measuring the Environmental Liabilities: obtained by
equivalence.

RESULTS
The results of this model show the per capita environ-
mental situation for each country or region studied in
the form of an ‘Environmental Balance Sheet’.
This pioneering study of USP was presented during the
award ceremony of the 2008 ECO Award, promoted by
the American Chamber of Commerce for Brazil, as part
of the lecture given by Minister Roberto Mangabeira Un-
ger on ‘Myths and realities of the Amazon’. It covered a
sample of seven countries of BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India
and China) and developed countries of America, Europe
and Asia (USA, Germany and Japan), which account for
68% of the GDP, 50% of the population and 48% of the
energy consumption, and the main economic blocs.
The consolidated balance sheet for the planet, deriving
from this study, was in deficit, with a negative net equi-
ty, that is, an unsecured environmental liability equiva-
lent to $ 2.3 thousand per year for each of the 6.6 billion
inhabitants. In this insolvent scenario, Brazil and Russia
will play a key role since they should present ‘environ-
mental superavit’, an advantage primarily conditioned
to urgent actions against the current deforestation.

THE USP TEAM

José Roberto Kassai (FEA/USP and YCRI) – jrkassai@usp.br
Rafael Feltran-Barbieri (PROCAM/USP) – rafaelfb@usp.br
Francisco Carlos B. Santos (IPEN/USP) – fcarlos@usp.br
L. Nelson Carvalho (FEA/USP) – lnelson@usp.br
Yara Cintra (FEA/USP) – yaracintra@usp.br
Alexandre Foschine (YCRI) – afoschine@uol.com.br

43
 6 BS
Barometer
of Sustainability
The World Conservation
Union (IUCN) e
The International
Development Research
Centre (IDRC)
COUNTRY
Canada.
WHAT IT IS
A methodology for assessing and communicating pro-
gress toward sustainable societies, which consistently
combines various social and environmental indicators,
disclosing an assessment of the state of people and the
environment through a scale of indices.
ORIGIN
Developed by several specialists, mainly those linked
with The World Conservation Union (IUCN) and The
International Development Research Centre (IDRC).
Prescott-Allen is one of the main researchers involved in
the development of this tool.
OBJECTIVE
It is a systems sustainability measurement model. It pro-
vides clear, rapidly communicated pictures of the con-
dition of the environment, the condition of the people
and, when analyzed in combination, the overall progress
towards sustainability. It also compares human and
ecosystem well-being within societies, the rate and di-
rection of change, and major strengths and weaknesses.
The Barometer of Sustainability is designed, according
to its authors, to governmental and non-governmen-
tal agencies, decision-makers and people involved with
sustainable development-related issues at any system’s
44
level, from local to global.
CONTENT
It is the only performance scale designed to measure
human and ecosystem well-being together without
submerging one in the other. Its two axes – one for
human well-being, the other for ecosystem well-being
– enable socioeconomic and environmental indicators
to be combined independently, keeping them separate
to allow analysis of people-ecosystem interactions.
The tool combines a series of environmental and so-
cial indicators (selected by the community), such as,
for instance: water quality, employment, economy,
education, crime, violence, etc., using performance
scales. Good or fair are defined as one end of the scale
and bad or poor as the other end, as well as the po-
sition of indicators can be outlined within this scale.
The result is a set of performance measures, all using
the same general scale, thus enabling the combination
and joint use of indicators.
The definition of indicators is based on some key prin-
ciples such as the consideration that people are part of
the ecosystem and, therefore, people and ecosystems
must be treated jointly and equally; and that raising
relevant issues within a context is critical and must
be done by a group of people linked with this context
(community engagement) and that are willing to col-
lectively ask and learn, since the lack of knowledge of
people-ecosystems relations is a well-known fact.
Prescott-Allen believes it is a logical way to turn ove-
rall concepts of sustainable development, well-being
and progress into a set of real human and ecological
conditions.
STEP BY STEP
In order to calculate or measure progress towards
sustainability, values are calculated for the social well-
being and ecosphere well-being, as well as the sub-in-
dices, if any. The ecosystem wellbeing index identifies
trends of the ecological function along time. It is a
function of water, land, air, biodiversity and resource
use. The human wellbeing index represents the ove-
rall level of well-being of society and is a function of
well-being concerning the individual, health, educa-
tion, unemployment, poverty, income, crime, as well
as human business and activities. It is a two-dimensio-
nal graph where human and ecosystem well-being sta-
tes are placed in relative scales ranging from 0 to 100,
indicating a situation that varies from bad to good in
relation to sustainability. A point defined by these two
axes within the two-dimensional graph shows a mea-
 BS 6

sure of sustainability or unsustainability of the system. O BAROMETER OF SUSTAINABILITY

The graphic representation of the results obtained from 100
the use of this tool are shown in the Figure.
Good
The indices calculated for each of the system’s dimen-
H 80
sions are plotted in the graph from their respective axes. U
The intersection point of these indices, represented in- M Fair
side the graph, portrays the system’s sustainability. The A
trends may represent progress or not of a certain city, N 60 30 40 Argentina
Chile
state or nation. Medium
55 55
W 36
42 56
E 40 Brazil 45 Ecuador
The scale used in the Barometer of Sustainability for 43 43
L Colombia
each of the axes ranges from 0 to 100, consisting of 100 L Poor
points and a 0 baseline. It is divided into five sectors of B
20 points each, plus its baseline equivalent to 0. Each E 20
sector corresponds to a color, which varies from red to I
N Bad
green, as shown by the figure above.
G
0
Bad Poor Medium Fair Good
RESULTS
20 40 60 80 100
There is a need to test the Barometer as a prototype me-
ECOSYSTEM WELLBEING
asurement instrument in ecosystem health under very
different cultural and ecological conditions. The testing Fonte: Prescott-allen, 2001
ground involves a process known as sentinel communi-
ty surveillance (SCS), which represents a combination
Referências
of quantitative and qualitative measurement techni-
ques. This provides for dialogue between communities www.idrc.ca
and public services; and, with the IDRC support, is now http://www.iucn.org/
operational in 37 countries worldwide. This proposal Prescott-Allen, R. The Wellbeing of Nations: a country-
will field test the Barometer in at least one district wi- by-country index of quality of life and the environment.
thin four selected countries: Costa Rica, Uganda, Nepal, Washington: Island Press, 2001.
and Mexico. It will address key questions of how the An Approach to Assessing Progress toward Sustainability:
Barometer leads to action; what is behind the reading; Tools and Training Series. IUCN - Publication Services
and how a changing situation is reflected in an evolving Unit, 219, C Huntington Road, Cambridge CB 3 ODL, UK
instrument. It will also address the optimization of in-
formation input; the balance of qualitative and quanti-
tative data; and the balance of the human health condi-
tion versus the ecosystem condition. Insofar as it can be
linked to governance, an assessment of the ability of the
Barometer to become an important tool in community
mobilization based on sound evidence will be assessed.

SUMMING INDICATORS UPON System

THE IUCN BAROMETER OF
SUSTAINABILITY HIERARCHY
Subsystem
Ecosystem People

Category
Biodiversity Land Water Air Resouce Needs Social Equity
use
Supply Quality Quantity Criterion

Indicator
Coliform bacteria

45
 6 BS

A screening form for sustainability

Indicate whether the system or technology has a negative (-), positive (+), or
neutral (n) impact on the listed criteria.

ECOSYSTEM
Biodiversity Water
• Wildlife diversity • Water access
• Rare or endangered species • Water supply
• Species abundance • Water quantity
• Wild plant diversity • Water quality
• Crop diversity • Drainage pattern
• Introduces exotic species? If yes,
this could be a negative (-) impact.
Air
Land • Air quality
• Wildlife habitat
• Vegetation cover
• Soil texture
• Nutrient recycling Resouce use
• Soil fertility • Land use
• Soil structure • Conservation of natural resouce
• Soil or slope stability (e.g., erosion) • Resouce use

People
Human needs Social self-determination
• Diverse outputs (productivity) • Family structure
• Food security • Gender roles
• Yeld (efficiency) • Popular growth
• Risk • Education
• Income or income distribution • Local culture
• Capital requirements • The rights of local communities
• Economic return, profit margin • Community health
• Labour requirements • Local economy / capital flow
• Maintenance / learning requirements • Local (re)investment
• Self-reliance (uses local materials?) • Community infrastructure (e.g., roads)
• Control over output and process • Community harvesting
• Living conditions (e.g., shelter) • Access to community resources (e.g. water, grazing lands)
• Human healt (e.g., sanitation, toxicity) • Community cultural landmarks
• energy supply (e.g., wood, fuel) • Community recreational activities
• Land tenure

Equity Questions (Yes = positive impact)

Who benefits?
• Does the system or technology respond to problems and
• women constrains identifed by villagers?
• Girls
• Were local people involved in all stages of the project planning
• Old
/ development?
• Poor
• Illiterate • Is the system or technology supported by the local power
• Men structure?
• Boys • Is the system or technology compatible with current local
• Young practices, preferences, and wisdom?
• Rich • Does the system or technology build on local practices and on
• Literate existing capacity?
• Does the system or technology supported by other factors
(e.g., land tenure, macro policy) ?

46

Calvert-Henderson
Quality of Life
Calvert Group
COUNTRY
USA
WHAT IT IS
It is an index to measure the quality of life in nations
that takes into account social, economic and environ-
mental trends and results through a systems approach.
ORIGIN
The Calvert-Henderson Quality of Life Indicators grew
out of a relationship between an international futurist,
Hazel Henderson, an asset management firm, Calvert
Group, and 12 scholars with expertise in quality of life
dimensions.
The Indicators, first published in 2000 in book format,
are the result of an extensive six-year study by a mul-
ti-disciplinary group of practitioners and scholars from
government agencies, for-profit firms, and nonprofit
organizations who see the need for more practical and
sophisticated metrics of societal conditions.
OBJECTIVE
Contributing to the worldwide effort to develop com-
prehensive statistics of national well-being that go
beyond traditional macroeconomic indicators. “Our
goal was to systematically measure and illuminate key
aspects of quality of life,” explains Hazel Henderson.
“This study outlines statistical data trends. We hope it
is an invaluable resource for citizens, businesses and the
local officials engaged in debates about quality of life.”
CALVERT 7
CONTENT
A systems approach is used to illustrate the dynamic
state of our social, economic and environmental quality
of life. The 12 Indicators are:
• Education
• Employment
• Energy
• Environment
• Health
• Human Rights
• Income
• Infrastructure
• National Security
• Public Safety
• Re-Creation
• Shelter
Each of these specific areas is unfolded into more one-
off indicators that, overall, manage to cover the uni-
verse of information necessary to develop a new way
to conceive quality of life, with a depth that would be
unfeasible with classical indicators.
It was decided not to aggregate data so as to turn them
into a monetary coefficient that would measure the va-
lue of ecological assets. Instead, a free and multidisci-
plinary methodology was chosen to present data in an
ordinary format, but not centered on a single figure. As
a result, people can focus on the details of each field.
RESULTS
For the first time the North-Americans have a tool to
assess how and in which areas the country is improving
(or worsening). For such purpose, it was not necessary to
build new indicators or carry out new research: the study
made use of existing data and selected the most reliable
ones. Then these data were crossed according to the ma-
jor axes of practical results expected by the population.
REFERENCE
www.calvert-henderson.com
www.calvertgroup.com
47
8 DNA
The Brazil DNA Index
Brazil DNA Institute
WHAT IT IS
This index aims to measure the real progress and quali-
ty of life in the country as compared to an ideal scenario
forecast for 2029.
ORIGIN
Brazil DNA Index is the result of a joint reflection on
the Brazilian development carried out by the Brazil DNA
Institute and the NEPP (University of Campinas Center
for Public Policy Studies). NEPP is supported by resear-
chers of the Economics Institute (IE) and the Center of
Studies on Population (NEPO), of the same university. It
was established with the help of participants in the Brazil
DNA Institute of the first annual meeting, held in 2004.
OBJECTIVE
It aims to:
• Visualize reality through indicators integrating various
dimensions;
• Compare the Brazilian reality with future expectations and
the situation of other countries;
• Measure the mobilization of public/private actors involved in
development projects.
The ultimate objective of the Brazil DNA Index is to
create a national mobilization around a project for so-
cial and economic development of the country, highli-
ghting the problematic issues and setting parameters
with the maximum seriousness and scientific orienta-
tion to guide the development of policies and the action
of individual and institutional players.
CONTENT
The Brazil DNA Index goes beyond the dimensions
used by the HDI – Human Development Index (inco-
me, longevity and education), and measures its result
based on seven social and economic dimensions (wi-
thout disregarding the demographic dimensions of the
Brazilian reality): 
1. Economic well-being
2. Economic competition
3. Social and environmental conditions
48
4. Education
5. Health
6. Basic social protection
7. Social cohesion
STEP BY STEP
A geometric shape was defined to sum up the compa-
rison of dimensions included in the study, based on fo-
recasts made by participants of the meeting organized
by the Brazil DNA Institute in October 2004, to which
was given value 1.
Worse scenarios for the same Brazilian indicator are
given a value below 1. Better scenarios, if any, are gi-
ven a value above 1. The set of points defined by the
Brazilian indicators presented in 2004 and referring to
the year 2002 had the shape of a polygon that can be
compared to the forecasts made by the participants in
the referred meeting.
Due to the amount of indicators, the (external) area of
the forecast polygon resembles the shape of a circle,
which was adopted to facilitate its graphic visualiza-
tion. In 2005, the information was updated and most of
it refers to 2003 data. The comparison with forecasts to
2029 was made, thus enabling the new relative scena-
rio of Brazil to be visualized against the forecasts.
The participants of that first meeting were asked to fo-
recast, for each indicator, one desirable and realistic
scenario to be achieved in 2029 from the actual Brazi-
lian situation portrayed by the 2002 information.
RESULTS
In its first measurement, the index showed that Brazil
was rating 46.8% out of the forecast 100%. Due to cor-
rections in the indicators, this index was later changed
to 47.6%. In other words, 52.4 percentage points sepa-
rated the Brazil of 2004 from the Brazil the Institute’s
board members forecast as plausible and rationally
desirable.
In 2005, the index improved a little, up to 49.3%. In
its third update, in 2006, it kept this trend, and had a
small increase to 51.4%.
REFERENCE
www.dnabrasil.org.br
2004 Summary index = 46.8% (PDF file)
www.nepp.unicamp.br/dnabrasil/sintese.pdf
2004 Full index (PDF file)
www.nepp.unicamp.br/dnabrasil/referencia.pdf
 DNA 8

DIMENSIONS AND INDICATORS HEALTH

SELECTED IN 2005 Potential Years of Life Lost (APVP)
Child Mortality
ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Mortality rates due to Cardiovascular Disease and
Per Capita Income and its Interregional Distribution Cerebrovascular Accidents (CVAs)
Ratio of Women’s to Men’s Average Earnings
Ratio of Black people’s to White people’s Earnings BASIC SOCIAL PROTECTION

Formal Employment Rate Social Security Coverage for People over 65

Health Care Funding
ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS
World Exports: Evolution of Brazil’s Share, with Special SOCIAL COHESION
Emphasis on Medium-High-Technology and High- Interpersonal Income Distribution
Technology Products or Sectors Homicide Rate for Men aged 15-24
Percentage of Teenage Mothers
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS Tax Justice
Appropriate Sewage Systems
Appropriate Destination of Urban Waste
Sewage Treatment

EDUCATION
High School Net Schooling Rate
High School Graduates at Expected Age
Student’s Performance at PISA – Programme for
International Student Assessment

Brazil DNA Index: 49.3%

The Brazil we are and the Brazil we would like to be

Per Capita Income

Tax Justice Formal Employment Rate
Teenage Mothers (%) Ratio of Women’s to Men’s Earnings
Income Distribution Inequality Ratio of Black to White Earnings

Homicide Rate for Men aged 15-24 1,0 Exports Share

0,8
Health Care Funding by Public Power (%) 0,6 Medium-High Technology and
0,4 High Technology Share

Per Capita Health Care Funding Appropriate Sewage Systems

Social Security Coverage – 65 Appropriate Destination of Waste

Mortality rates due to Sewage Treatment

Cardiovascular Disease – Female

Mortality rates due to High School Schooling Rate

Cardiovascular Disease – Male
Child Mortality High School Graduates at Expected Age
Potential Years of Life Lost - Female Student’s Performance at PISA
Potential Years of Life Lost – Male

Dimensions A. Economic Well-being C. Social and Environmental E. Health G. Social Cohesion

B. Economic Competitiveness D. Education F. Social Protection

49
 8 DNA

Brazil DNA Index 2004/2005

Comparison between the 2004 Index (gray) and the 2005 Index (black)

Per Capita Income

Tax Justice Formal Employment Rate
Teenage Mothers (%) Ratio of Women’s to Men’s Earnings
Income Distribution Inequality Ratio of Black to White Earnings

Homicide Rate for Men aged 15-24 1,0

Exports Share
0,8
0,6
Health Care Funding by Public Power (%) Medium-High Technology and
0,4 High Technology Share

Per Capita Health Care Funding Appropriate Sewage Systems

Social Security Coverage – 65 Appropriate Destination of Waste

Mortality rates due to Sewage Treatment

Cardiovascular Disease – Female

Mortality rates due to High School Schooling Rate

Cardiovascular Disease – Male
Child Mortality High School Graduates at Expected Age
Potential Years of Life Lost - Female Student’s Performance at PISA
Potential Years of Life Lost – Male

2004 = 47,6% 2005 = 49,3%

Actual Brazil DNA Index: 55,3%

O What the “Actual Brazil” wants

Per Capita Income

Tax Justice Formal Employment Rate
Teenage Mothers (%) Ratio of Women’s to Men’s Earnings

Income Distribution Inequality Ratio of Black to White Earnings

Homicide Rate for Men aged 15-24 Exports Share

1,0
0,8
Health Care Funding by Public Power (%) G A
A 0,6 Medium-High Technology and
G 0,4 High Technology Share
DDF F
Social Security Coverage – 65 BB Appropriate Sewage Systems
EE C
C
Mortality rates due to Appropriate Destination of Waste
Cardiovascular Disease – Female

Mortality rates due to Sewage Treatment

Cardiovascular Disease – Male
High School Schooling Rate
Child Mortality
High School Graduates at Expected Age
Potential Years of Life Lost - Female
Student’s Performance at PISA
Potential Years of Life Lost – Male

Dimensions A. Economic Well-being C. Social and Environmental E. Health G. Social Cohesion

B. Economic Competitiveness D. Education F. Social Protection

50

Dashboard
of Sustainability
International Institute
for Sustainable
Development – IISD
COUNTRIES
Canada and otherss
WHAT IT IS
It is an aggregated index of several economic, environ-
mental and social indicators that visually displays coun-
try-specific advances in these three dimensions toward
(or away from) sustainability by using the metaphor of
a vehicle’s instrument panel.
ORIGIN
It was developed by the Consultative Group on Sustai-
nable Development Indicators, an international team of
sustainability experts, coordinated by International Ins-
titute for Sustainable Development – IISD (Canada).
The Consultative Group on Sustainable Development
Indicators developed in 1998 an aggregated conceptual
system to supply information on the direction of de-
velopment and its sustainability level, the Compass of
Sustainability. In 1999, the group focused on linking its
work with the sustainability indicator initiative of the
Bellagio Forum for Sustainable Development (one of
the main sponsors of the work). As a result of this in-
tegration, this group created the dashboard metaphor
that resulted in the model named Dashboard of Sustai-
nability. The Dashboard of Sustainability has garnered
international attention and displays the United Nations’
core set of sustainability indicators. As a contribution
to the World Summit on Sustainable Development in
2002, IISD expanded the Dashboard to provide users
with the functionality to compare 10 years of environ-
DS 9
mental, social and economic data. The latest addition to
the collection of Dashboard presentations is the Millen-
nium Development Goals Dashboard (MDGs).
OBJECTIVE
Using the metaphor of a vehicle’s instrument panel,
it displays country-specific assessments of economic,
environmental, social and institutional performance
toward (or away from) sustainability. It is suitable for
decision-makers and others interested in sustainable
development, as it is an online tool designed to be un-
derstood by experts, the media, policy-makers and the
general public.
The new edition promotes the Millennium Develop-
ment Goals (MDGs) indicators — especially for deve-
loping countries. These indicators help define Poverty
Reduction Strategies and monitor the achievement of
the MDGs
CONTENT
Initially, the framework was made functional for the
comparison of countries by using 46 indicators to
compose the three main clusters: the environmental
area, with 13 indicators, the economic area, with 15
indicators, and the social area, with 18 indicators.
These indicators comprise the database of the Consul-
tative Group on Sustainable Development Indicators,
which covers more than 100 countries.
Each of the indicators within the sustainability scopes
or dimensions proposed by the system can be assessed
both in terms of sustainability1 and decision-making
process2 from two main elements: relevance and per-
formance. The relevance of a certain indicator is shown
by the size it takes against others in the visual represen-
tation of the corresponding system. As for the indica-
tor performance, it is measured by a color code ranging
from deep red to deep green.
1 An additional function calculates the average of displays (economic,
social and environmental performance), so that a global sustainability
index or Sustainable Development Index –SDI can be reached.
2 In case the objective is to assess the decision-making process, the Po-
licy Performance Index, PPI is calculated.
51
 9 DS

A recent graphic representation of the Dashboard of
Sustainability system is built through a visual dash-
board with three displays corresponding to three
clusters of indicators that measure the status of the
environment, the economy, and the social well-being
of a nation. The current performance of the system is
communicated using a simple color code from deep
green (“very good”) to deep yellow (“acceptable”) to
red (“very bad, critical”). A graph seeks to reflect the
change in that performance over time; and there is a
gauge showing the amount remaining of certain criti-
cal stocks. In this sense, the indicators tend to faci-
litate the process of communication of sustainable
development, turning this concept into numerical
data, descriptive measures and guiding signs.
Currently, according to the authors, all indicators
within each of the scopes have equal weight.
A typical Dashboard view – a map of Africa, using
a color code ranging from deep red (“critical situa-
tion”) to deep green (“excellent”).

Figura 1 - O Dashboard of Sustainability

U S T E N TA B
R ALL S ILI
O VE TY

OM ENTAL QUA IAL HEALTH MIC PERFORMA

VIR LIT SOC ONO NC
EN Y E C E

RES C A P I TA L S
ERVES ASSETS

! ! !
Enviromental Alerts Social Alerts Economic Alerts
Water Poverty Inflation

Fonte: adaptado de Hardi & Zdan, 2000.

52
 DS 9

Indicator: Ratio of literate females to males

Kenia
Latest year
Source
Morocco Tunisia World Bank
Women in Girls to boys
parliament in education
Algeria Libyan Arab
Gender Jamahiriya
equality and Morocco Egypt
78% ages 15 - 24
empowerment 453 points
of women Cape Verde
Mauritania
Senegal Mali
Niger Chad Eritrea
Sudan
Women Female Cape Verde
93% ages 15 - 24 Burkina Faso Djibouti
employment literacy 653 points Guinea Benin
Siera Leone Nigeria
Ghana Central African Republic Ethiopia
Liberia
EPH UPE GEW ChM IMH HMD EES GPD O Togo Cameroon
Ivory Coast Kenia
Rwanda Equatorial Guinea Republic
Congo Rwanda Uganda Somalia
Gabon
Latest year São Tome and Principe
Burundi
% ages 15 - 24 Congo. Dem. Rep.
Tanzania
Women in Girls to boys 119 Comoros
parliament in education 109 .. 104 Angola
Malawi
102 .. 95 Mayotle
Zambia
Gender 94 .. 86
equality and Namibia Zimbabwe
Mozambique
85 .. 78
empowerment Botswana
of women 76 .. 71

67 .. 62

Women Female .. Swaziland

employment literacy South Africa Madagascar 92%
52 .. 44
ages 15 - 24,
no data Lesotho 640 points

STEP BY STEP countries, but it can also be applied for urban and regio-
nal indices. These indicators comprise the database of the
The Dashboard of Sustainability is a free, non-com- Consultative Group on Sustainable Development Indica-
mercial software package. This tool links a free sof- tors, which covers more than 100 countries.
tware package to a flexible international database,
enabling each individual, association, advocacy group, REFERENCE
etc. to consult numerous data, create panels on me-
www.iisd.org/cgsdi/
asurement, as well as building one or more national
www.iisd.org/cgsdi/dashboard.asp
combined indicators, changing the number and wei-
Download the Dashboard
ghting of variables at its own discretion. esl.jrc.it/envind/dashbrds.htm

RESULTS
The tool is meant to be used for comparison between

53
 10 EF
Ecological Footprint
Mathis Wackernagel e
William Rees da University
of British Columbia
COUNTRY
USA
WHAT IT IS
It is a tool to manage the use of natural resources by
individuals, cities, nations and humanity as a whole. It
measures the extent to which humanity is using nature’s
resources faster than they can regenerate.
ORIGIN
Developed by the team of Mathis Wackernagel and
William Rees at the University of British Columbia in
1993, the Ecological Footprint methodology has ma-
tured considerably over the past years. Development
and standardization of this accounting method are
currently coordinated by Global Footprint Network,
founded in 2003, and its 50 partner organizations.
Global Footprint Network is committed to fostering
a world where all people have the opportunity to live
satisfying lives within the means of Earth’s ecological
capacity.
Footprints vary widely by region. Global Footprint
Network, with its partner WWF International, have
published reports for Europe and Asia, and recently
released a report for Africa in partnership with Swiss
Agency for Development and Cooperation.
The first release of the Standards, Ecological Footprint
Standards 2006, was issued in June of this year with
focus on Sub-National Population studies.
Development of the next edition of Ecological Foot-
54
print Standards has started. In this edition the Foot-
print Committees will expand the Standards to more
specifically address organizational Footprints, as well
as the Footprint of Products, Processes and Services.
The Committees are in the final stages of drafting the
Certification process for Footprint assessments.
OBJECTIVE
Ecological Footprint accounting measures the extent
to which the ecological demand of human economies
stays within or exceeds the capacity of the biosphere to
supply goods and services. These accounts help indivi-
duals, organizations, and governments frame policies,
set targets, and track progress toward sustainability.
From a sustainability perspective, when humanity’s Foo-
tprint exceeds the amount of renewable biocapacity, a
draw down in natural capital is required and this is con-
sidered unsustainable. Global Footprint accounts over
the last forty years indicate a twenty-five year growth
trend beyond the amount of renewable biocapacity. In
short, humanity’s Ecological Footprint appears to have
breached ecological limits and is thus unsustainable.
Keeping track of the compound effect of humanity’s
consumption of natural resources and generation of
waste is one key to achieving sustainability.
CONTENT
This resource accounting tool measures the extent to
which humanity is using nature’s resources faster than
they can regenerate. It illustrates who uses how much
of which ecological resources, with populations defined
either geographically or socially. It also shows to what
extent humans dominate the biosphere at the expense
of wild species.
The Footprint of a population is the total amount of bio-
logically productive land and water area that the popula-
tion requires to produce the resources it consumes and
absorb the waste it generates, using current technology.
Since people consume resources and ecological servi-
ces from all over the world, their Footprint is the sum of
these areas, regardless of where they are located on the
planet.
PUBLISHED STUDIES
Among the most recent studies are “Europe 2005: The
Ecological Footprint” and “Asia-Pacific 2005: The Eco-
logical Footprint and Natural Wealth” (both in part-
nership with WWF); “Global Footprint Network 2005

Annual Report” and “Africa’s Ecological Footprint:
Human Well-Being and Ecological Capital” (in part-
nership with the Swiss Agency for Development and
Cooperation). The results of studies in 150 countries
have also been published.
Ecological Footprint Standards 2006 – The publication
of standards used to measure the ecological footprint
aimed at guaranteeing the scientific integrity of the me-
thodology and to produce consistent and comparable
data. This first release of the standards has two parts:
I. Applications Standards - define requirements for
calculating Footprint results, to ensure that Footprint
calculations are conducted in a consistent manner, so
that results are reproducible and comparable with other
studies employing common boundary definitions.
1. 1. Consistency with National Footprint Accounts
2. Definition of Study Boundaries
3. Sub-National Population Calculations
4. (Place holder for organizational and product studies: Not
released)
5. Derivative Conversion Factors
6. Consistency of Components
7. Use of Non-Standard Elements in Footprint studies
8. (Place holder for calculation methods: Not Released)
9. Error Estimates (GUIDELINE)
II. Communication Standards - define requirements
for reporting Footprint results, to ensure that project
reports do not distort the intention nor misrepresent
the limitations of the National Accounts.
10. Traceability to National Footprint Accounts
11. Glossary, Definitions and Versions
12. Separation of Analytical Footprint Results from
Normative or Values-based Interpretations.
13. Footprint Scenarios
14. Footprint Study Limitations
15. Explanation of Link between Sustainability and Footprint
16. Citation of sources and description of methodologies
17. Reference to Standards and Certifying Bodies
18. Communication style (GUIDELINE)
The Ecological Footprint Standards contain both com-
pulsory Standards and voluntary Guidelines.
• Standards are those elements that are required for
EF 10
Footprint studies to be certified. In other words, all
standards (unless they are not applicable) must be met
in order to qualify for certification. Global Footprint
Network will establish a certification system based on
these standards.
• Guidelines are recommended practices which are not
required for study certification.
Online information – there are many studies available
at www.footprintnetwork.org, including:
• Humanity’s Footprint 1961-2002 – Ecological Foo-
tprint accounts estimate how many Earths were nee-
ded to meet the resource requirements of humanity for
each year since 1961, when complete UN statistics be-
came available.
• National Footprint Accounts currently exist for
over 150 countries in hectares and acres, for each year
from 1961 to 2002. Totaling the national Footprints of
each country provides us with the global analysis.
STEP BY STEP
The Ecological Footprint can be applied at scales ran-
ging from single products to households, organizations,
cities, regions, nations, and humanity as a whole.
ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT ACCOUNTS AND THE CURRENT
FIGURES:
In order to calculate the Ecological Footprint it is neces-
sary to estimate the consumption of goods and services
and the production of residues by the population unit
under study. Those goods and services include various
categories, such as food, clothing, transport, energy,
leisure, housing, wood products (firewood, paper, fur-
niture…), etc. Afterwards, the area required for the
production of each item is estimated, dividing the ave-
rage annual consumption of that item by the measure
of its productivity. Each one of those areas is considered
equivalent to a type of biologically productive area, and
its sum constitutes the Ecological Footprint.
The footprint is a rectangle. The base is proportional to
the number of inhabitants, and the height represents
the per capita consumption of resources. By multi-
plying the base by the height, we get the consumption
of resources of this population. In 1999, the per capita
productive area available was 1.9 hectares and the per
capita area able to provide for the resources consumed
that year was 2.3 hectares. This corresponds to an over-
dimensioning: we would require 120% of the Earth area
55
 10 EF

to bear our lifestyle, that is, the humanity is using 120% Nowadays, the Ecological Footprint exceeds the rege-
of the Earth’s capacity. nerative capacity of the planet by 23%. In other words,
more than one year and three months are necessary
The National Footprint and Biocapacity Accounts
for the Earth to regenerate what is used in a single
provide the basis for all Ecological Footprint analyses.
year. Maintaining or increasing this gap will result in
Information is presented in consistently formatted ba-
the exhaustion of the natural resources of the planet.
lance sheets, which use extensive data sets largely from
This is an underestimated major threat that has not
United Nations agencies. With over 4,000 data points
and 10,000 calculations per country per year, national been properly addressed.
Footprint accounts document the natural resources Source: www.panda.org/livingplanet/lpr00/ecofoot.cfm
(e.g., cropland, pasture, forests and fisheries) available
within the country as well as the country’s demand on REFERENCE
these resources. www.footprintnetwork.org
www.rprogress.org/newprojects/ecolFoot.shtml
TO CALCULATE YOUR ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT
www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/Ann1132753060
Individual Footprint – a quiz (Ecological Footprint Quiz)
on habits and attitudes, available at www.myfootprint.org.

RESULTS
Today, most countries, and the world as a whole, are
running ecological deficits. The world’s ecological defi-
cit is equal to its ecological overshoot1.

Ecological Footprint by Region, 1996

12 –

10 – North America
Western Europe
Área units per person

8– Central and Eastern Europe

Middle East and Central Asia
6–
Latin America and the Caribbean

4–
Asian/Pacific
Africa
2–

0–
299 384 343 307 484 3.222 710
OECD
Non-OECD

Population (milions)

1
When humanity’s ecological resource demands exceed
what nature can continually supply, we move into what is
termed ecological overshoot.

56

Environmental
Performance
Index - EPI
Yale University and
Columbia University
COUNTRY
USA
WHAT IT IS
It is a method of quantifying and numerically scaling
the environmental performance of a set of companies
or countries.
ORIGIN
The Pilot 2006 Environmental Performance Index was
developed by a team of environmental experts at the
environment school at Yale University and the Earth
Institute at Columbia University in collaboration with
the World Economic Forum and the Joint Research
Centre of the European Commission. This measure of
the environmental performance of countries was for-
mally released in Davos, Switzerland, at the annual me-
eting of the World Economic Forum in January 2006.
Data constraints and limitations in methodology make
this a work in progress. Further refinements will be un-
dertaken in the coming year as the EPI project moves
beyond its pilot phase.
NOTE
The EPI is not an update of the Environmental Sustai-
nability Index (ESI), but rather a new effort to gauge
countries against a set of 16 specific environmental po-
licy targets.
EPI 11
OBJECTIVE
The EPI provides a powerful tool for improving policy-
making and shifting environmental decision making
onto firmer analytic foundations. It centers on two bro-
ad environmental protection objectives that mirror the
priorities expressed by the environmental dimension of
the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals:
1) reducing environmental stresses on human health
and 2) protecting ecosystem vitality.
CONTENT
The EPI identifies targets for environmental perfor-
mance and measures how close each country comes
to these goals using the best data available, thus pro-
viding benchmarks for current national pollution
control and natural resource management results. The
issue-by-issue and aggregate rankings facilitate cross-
country comparisons both globally and within rele-
vant peer groups.
The 2006 EPI ranks 133 countries on 16 indicators tra-
cked in six established policy categories: Environmen-
tal Health, Air Quality, Water Resources, Biodiversity
and Habitat, Productive Natural Resources, and Sus-
tainable Energy. Incomplete data excluded 60 coun-
tries from the 2006 EPI.
The 2006 EPI generates a number of policy conclu-
sions. A country’s wealth emerges as a significant de-
terminant of environmental outcomes. But at every
level of development, some countries achieve envi-
ronmental results that far exceed their peers, demons-
trating that policy choices also affect performance.
The Index reveals that nations at all levels of economic
development face serious environmental challenges.
Industrialized countries often suffer from pollution
and degraded ecosystems. Developing countries must
confront the additional challenge of managing envi-
ronmental health stresses such as water-borne disea-
ses and indoor air pollution.
ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDEX
CRITERIA
General objectives
Environmental Health
Ecosystem vitality
Policy-related categories
Environmental Health
57
 11 EPI

AIR QUALITY Water consumption

Water resources Wilderness protection
Biodiversity and habitat Ecoregion protection
Productive natural resources Timber harvest rate
Sustainable energy Agricultural subsidies
Overfishing
Indicadores Energy efficiency
Child mortality Renewable energy
Indoor air pollution CO2 per GDP
Drinking water
Adequate sanitation RESULTS
Urban particulates The top-ranked countries all commit significant re-
Regional ozone sources and effort to environmental protection, re-
Nitrogen loading sulting in strong performance across most of the po-

INDICATORS POLICY CATEGORIES BROAD OBJECTIVES OVERAL PERFORMANCE

Child Mortality

Indoor Air Pollution

Drinking Water Enviromental Health

Adequate Sanitation
Enviromental Health
Urban Particulates

Regional Ozone Air Quality

Nitrogen Loading Water Resouces

Water Consuption
Enviromental
Wilderness Protection Performance Index
Biodiversity and Habitat
Ecoregion Protection

Timber Harvest Rate

Agricultural Subsidies Productive Natural

Resouces Ecosystem Vitality
Overfishing

Energy Efficiency

Renewable Energy Sustainable Energy

CO2 Per GDP

58
 EPI 11

licy categories. New Zealand ranked first, followed, infrastructure (such as drinking water and sanitation
respectively, by Sweden, Finland, Czech Republic, systems) and weak regulatory systems.
and the United Kingdom. The United States ranked
28th, which reflects top-tier performance on envi- REFERENCE
ronmental health issues, but also indicates that the www.yale.edu/epi/
US is under-performing on critical issues such as re- beta.sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/es/epi
newable energy, greenhouse gas emissions, and water
resources.
Among the middle-rank countries, performance is of-
ten uneven. Brazil, for example, ranked 34th, has very
high water scores but low biodiversity indicators.
The lowest-ranked countries – Ethiopia, Mali, Mau-
ritania, Chad and Niger – are underdeveloped na-
tions with little capacity to invest in environmental

Pilot 2006 Enviromental Performance Index

Overall EPI Score by country Quintile

78.8 - 88.1 69.6 - 78.7 60.3 - 69.5 51.7 - 60.2 25.6 - 51.6 no data

59
 12 ESI

Environmental OBJECTIVE
The ESI is a cross-country benchmarking tool, inclu-

Sustentability ding the following dimensions:

• Environmental systems: air quality, water quality, water

Index – Esi
quantity, etc.
• Reducing environmental stress: reducing pollution, lower
stress on the ecosystem, etc.
• Reducing human vulnerability: basic sanitation.
YCELP • Social and institutional capacity: corporate governance,
science and technology.
Center for Environmental • Global stewardship: international agreements, cooperation
Law and Policy in environmental agreements, etc.

Each dimension has its corresponding concept.

CIESIN of • Firstly, vital environmental systems must be maintained at

healthy levels rather than deteriorating;

Columbia University • It is also essential that the levels of anthropogenic stress

are low and do not cause harm to its environmental systems;
Center for International Earth • Thirdly, food and health should not be vulnerable to
environmental disturbances;
Science Information Network • In the fourth place, there must be institutions and
underlying social patterns of skills, attitudes, and networks
that foster effective responses to environmental challenges;
• Finally, there must be cooperation among countries to
manage common environmental problems and reduce
negative transboundary environmental impacts.

The index serves as a basis that makes cross-country

comparisons possible, at each version, allowing asses-
COUNTRY sment of sustainability practices evolution. It helps to
USA warn the member countries about future problems
such as natural resources scarcity or their misuse, and
risk management.
WHAT IT IS
The Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI) bench- CONTENT
marks the ability of nations to “protect the environment The ESI is calculated by integrating 76 data sets into 21
over the next several decades.” It is used by around 140 indicators of environmental sustainability.
countries and consists of 21 weighted core indicators,
each of them building on between two and eight va- I ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
riables that allow the assessment of environmental sus- 1. Air quality
tainability performance nationwide including air and 2. Biodiversity
water quality, biodiversity and natural resources mana-
3. Land
gement..
4. Water quality
5. Water quantity
ORIGIN
II REDUCING ENVIRONMENTAL STRESSES
The ESI is an Initiative of the Yale Center for Envi-
ronmental Law and Policy – YCELP (www.yale.edu/ 6. Reducing air pollution
envirocenter) and the Center for International Earth 7. Reducing ecosystem stress
Science Information Network – CIESIN of Columbia 8. Reducing population pressure
University (www.ciesin.columbia.edu), in collaboration 9. Reducing waste and consumption pressures
with the World Economic Forum (www.weforum.org)
10. Reducing water stress
and the Joint Research Centre of the European Com-
mission (www.jrc.cec.eu.int/uasa). 11. Natural resource management

60
 ESI 12

III REDUCING HUMAN VULNERABILITY RESULTS

12. Environmental health
13. Basic human sustenance
14. Reducing environment-related natural disaster
vulnerability
VI SOCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY
15. Environmental governance
16. Eco-efficiency
17. Private-sector responsiveness
18. Science and technology
V GLOBAL STEWARDSHIP
19. Participation in international collaborative efforts
20. Greenhouse gas emissions
21. Reducing transboundary environmental pressures
By using strict rules aimed at avoiding mistakes, the
survey provided a full and unbiased picture of the re-
ality.
The ranking is made from pre-established scores for each
one of the 21 indicators, being top ranked the ones achie-
ving the highest scores (Brazil stands out positively in wa-
ter quality and quantity and scores poorly in air quality)
A study carried out by Yale University, USA and Co-
lumbia University, USA, and released in early 2005, pla-
ced Brazil 11th in the ESI.
For the sake of comparison, it is worth mentioning
some positions and scores in the ESI ranking and score:
Uruguay (3rd, 71.8 points), Argentina (9th, 62.7 points),
Brazil (11th, 62.2 points), Australia (13th, 61.0 points)
and the United States (45th, 52.9 points).
The top five countries are Finland, Norway, Uruguay,
Sweden and Iceland, considered rich in natural resour-
ces, whereas the lowest ranking countries are North
Korea, Iraq, Taiwan, Turkmenistan e Uzbequistan.
REFERENCE
sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/es/esi/
sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/es/esi/ESI2005.pdf
(completo)
sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/es/esi/ESI2005_policysummary.pdf
(resumo)
sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/es/esi/ESI2005_Main_Report.pdf
www.yale.edu/epi/2006EPI_Rankings.pdf
www.ciesin.org/
www.yale.edu/epi/
www.econ.fea.usp.br/zeeli/artigos_valor/052_2005_07_19.htm

ENVIROMENTAL SUSTENTABILITY INDEX COUNTRY SCORES BY QUINTILE

59.7 - 75.1
52.5 - 59.8
46.6 - 52.4
40.5 - 48.2
29.2 - 40.0

61
 13 EVI

Environmental
processes that can negatively influence the sustainable
development of countries.

Vulnerability The EVI provides a rapid and standardized method for

Index – EVI
SOPAC
South Pacific Applied
Geoscience Commission
UNEP
United Nations
Environment Programme
COUNTRIES
New Zealand, Norway, Ireland, Italy;
United Nations Environment Program.
WHAT IT IS
It is an Environmental Vulnerability Index that takes
into account human well-being as a whole.
ORIGIN
EVI has been developed by the South Pacific Applied
Geoscience Commission (SOPAC), the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP), and their partners.
The index was developed through consultation and
collaboration with countries, institutions and experts
across the globe. While further refinements and im-
provements will always be necessary, the index is now
ready for application at country level. It is designed for
use in all countries.
OBJECTIVE
The EVI reflects the extent to which the natural envi-
ronment of a country is prone to damage and degra-
dation. It is designed to be used with economic and
social vulnerability indices to provide insights into the
characterizing vulnerability in an overall sense, and
identifying issues that may need to be addressed within
each of the three pillars of sustainability, namely envi-
ronmental, economic and social aspects of a country’s
development.
Development is often achieved through trade-offs be-
tween these pillars. Therefore, in order to promote sus-
tainability, it has become increasingly important to be
able to measure how vulnerable each aspect is to dama-
ge and to identify ways of building resilience. With this
information to hand, the outcome for countries could
be optimized for their unique situations and develop-
ment goals.
CONTENT
Healthy, productive and protective environments, so-
cial systems and economies are the basis of sustainable
development and human welfare. While the environ-
ment is the source of all raw materials used by society,
it also absorbs all the pollution generated by our ac-
tivities. By taking care of daily economic and social
issues, we convert natural resources and services to
give us support.
The problem is that all of these systems can be dama-
ged, overloaded, or prevented from meeting our needs.
By our choices we can, to a large extent, determine our
own quality of life, the condition of our lands and op-
portunities for future generations.
EThis is the proposal of the EVI methodology: un-
derstanding and measuring the vulnerabilities of
the environment means foreseeing greater and irre-
versible damage that may endanger mankind’s futu-
re well-being.
The EVI is based on 50 indicators for estimating the
vulnerability of the environment of a country to future
shocks. These indicators are combined by simple ave-
raging and reported simultaneously as a single index, a
range of policy-relevant thematic sub-indices and as a
profile showing the results for each indicator.
Simple averages across indicators were used because they
can be easily understood and more complex models do
not appear to offer any advantages to the expression or
utility of the index. This overview with drill-down struc-
ture means that, in addition to an overall signal of vulne-
rability, the EVI can be used to identify specific problems.
Each indicator is classified into a range of sub-indices
including the three aspects of hazards; resistance and

62
 EVI 13

damage and into policy-relevant sub-indices including: Results

Climate Change = CC 235 countries received scores according to their environ-
Biodiversity = CBD mental level of vulnerability/resilience as calculated by
the EVI, thus building a world ranking.
Water = W
It is important to highlight that the scores considered
Agriculture and fisheries = AF
valid were those from countries who supplied data for
Human health aspects = HH over 80% of the 50 EVI indicators. The countries with
insufficient data (less than 80% of the 50 indicators) were
Desertification = CCD
classified as prone to environmental vulnerability.
Exposure to Natural disasters = D
Each country was classified in one of the following
Each indicator is also accompanied by a short form key catego¬ries: Extremely Vulnerable; Highly Vulnerable,
name, detailed definition, keywords and a description Vulnerable, At Risk, or Resilient.
of the main signals for which it is a proxy as well as the
indicators policy relevance. Among the countries with valid indices, Argentina,
Brazil, United States, New Zealand and Sweden were
SUMMARY EVI INDICATOR LISTI classi¬fied as vulnerable. Australia, Bolivia, Canada,
www.vulnerabilityindex.net/EVI_Indicators.htm Mozambique, Paraguay and Uruguay are among those
www.vulnerabilityindex.net/Files/EVI%20Descriptions%202 consi¬dered at risk. Austria, Belgium, Italy, Israel, Japan
005.pdf
and United Kingdom are classified as extremely vulne-
1. High winds 26. Fragmentation rable, whereas only ten countries, mostly in the African
2. Dry periods 27. Degradation continent, were considered resilient.
3. Wet periods 28. Reserves
REFERENCE
4. Hot periods 29. MPA’s
www.vulnerabilityindex.net/
5. Cold periods 30. Farming
6. SST 31. Fertilizers
EVI SCORES FOR ALL COUNTRIES
7. Volcanoes 32. Pesticides (includes data deficient countries)
8. Earthquakes 33. Biotech
90 -
9. Tsunamis 34. Fisheries
81
10. Slides 35. Fishing effort 80 -

11. Land area 36. Water 70 -

62
12. Dispersion 37. Air 60 -
13. Isolation 38. Waste
50 -
14. Relief 39. Treatment 43
40 - 35
15. Lowlands 40. Industry
30 -
16. Borders 41. Spills
17. Imbalance 42. Mining 20 -
14
18. Openness 43. Sanitation 10 -

19. Migrations 44. Vehicles 0-

Resilient At risk Vulnerable Highly Extremely
20.Endemics 45. Population
vulnerable vulnerable
21. Introductions 46. Growth
EVI classification
22. Endangered 47. Tourists
23. Extinctions 48. Coastal
24. Vegetation 49. Agreements
25. Loss of cover 50. Conflicts

63
 14 GPI
Genuine Progress
Indicator – GPI
Redefining Progress
COUNTRY
USA
WHAT IT IS
Index to measure a nation’s progress considering well-
being and environmental parameters, as an alternative in-
dicator to the GDP.
ORIGIN
The GPI was created in 1995 by Redefining Progress, a
non-profit public policy organization founded in 1994,
which put forward solutions aimed at helping people, pro-
tecting the environment and developing the economy.
ObjeCtiVE
The GPI measures economic growth of a country as-
sociated with increase in the well being of its inhabi-
tants. The index proposes a comparison with the GDP,
seeking to show to what extent traditional economic
growth is compromising the planet’s future life.
CONTENT
The indicator uses the same calculation methodology
as the GDP, but unlike the GDP, it makes deductions
to account for costs derived from factors such as cri-
me, pollution, environmental de¬gradation, depletion
of non-renewable resources and other forms of natu-
ral capital such as water supply. On the other hand, it
makes additions to account for items such as household
and volunteer labor.
Both the GDP and GPI are measured in monetary ter-
ms, which allows comparisons. The index is updated
annually to provide an accurate and true portrait of
economic progress.
64
Factors considered by the GPI as opposed to the GDP
calculation:
I. Crime and Family Breakdown – Factors that take a lar-
ge economic toll on individuals and society in the form
of fines, medical expenses, lost property, etc. The GDP
addresses such expenses as additions to well-being,
whereas the GPI deducts them.
II. Household Work and Volunteer Work – Highly rele-
vant contributions to society that go unmeasured in
the GDP, because they are not done for pay. The GPI
corrects such omission and adds, among other things,
the value of household work through an estimate of the
cost of hiring someone to do equivalent work.
III. Income distribution – Increase in income does not
mean improvement for all, because inequality between
the very rich and the least well off may also be rising.
The GPI increases when the poor receive a higher per-
centage of the national income, and decreases with a
lower percentage.
IV. Depletion of Resources – Once the current eco¬nomic
activity depletes the natural capital necessary for future
activities, it is not truly contributing to well-being. On
the contrary, it is shifting a cost to future generations
that should be borne in the present as a resource rent.
In the GDP accounts, such rents are part of the cur-
rent income, whereas the GPI counts the depletion or
degradation of wetlands, forests, farmland and non-re-
newable minerals (including oil) as a current cost.
V. Pollution - For the GDP, pollution is a double bene-
fit to the economy since GDP increases with polluting
activities and then again with clean-ups. The GPI, on
its turn deducts air and water pollution, measured ac-
cording to the current harm on human health and the
environment.
VI. Long-term Environmental Damage – Climate chan-
ge and nuclear waste management are two long-term
costs generated from fossil fuel and nuclear energy use.
These costs are not accounted for in traditional econo-
mic calculations. The same occurs with ozone deple-
tion, caused by substances such as the chlorofluoro-
carbons (CFCs). For this reason, the GPI addresses the
consumption of certain sources of energy and ozone-
depleting substances as costs.
VII. Loss of Leisure Time – As a nation gets richer, people
should be able to choose between spending more time
on the job or having more time for family, chores or lei-
sure. However, much the opposite has occurred in the
last few years. The GDP ignores the loss of leisure time,
but the GPI considers leisure very valuable. When lei-
sure time increases, the GPI goes up; otherwise it goes
down.
 GPI 14

VIII. Defensive Expenditures – The GDP considers the PERSONAL CONSUMPTION

money spent by people on prevention of decrease in
Economic costs
quality of life or compensation for the externalities as
Unequal income distribution
an increase in well-being. Examples of such expenses
Net foreign lending or borrowing
are medical expenses, damage or economic loss due
Cost of consumer durables.
to automobile accidents, cost of commuting, and hou-
sehold pollution abatement, such as water filters. The Social costs
GPI accounts these “defensive” expenditures as costs Cost of crime
instead of benefits. Cost of automobile accidents
Cost of commuting
IX. Cost of Consumer Durables and Public Infrastructure
Cost of family breakdown
– The GDP mistakes the money generated by consu-
Loss of leisure time
mers’ purchases, such as household appliances, for the
actual value consumers receive from them. This hides Cost of underemployment
the loss of well-being due to the fact that these pro- Environmental costs
ducts are made to last little. Because of this, the GPI Cost of household pollution abatement
treats the services of household capital as a benefit and Cost of water pollution
the initial purchase price as a cost. This also applies to Cost of air pollution
public infrastructure and services of highways. Cost of noise pollution
Loss of wetlands
X. Net Foreign Borrowing – If a nation allows its capi-
tal assets to decrease or relies on foreign funding to fi- Loss of farmlands
nance its current consumption, it is living beyond its Depletion of non-renewable resources
own resources. The GPI considers net lending as posi- Cost of long-term environmental damage
tive contributions to the well-being and net borrowing Cost of ozone depletion
from abroad as deductions. If wealth borrowed is in- Loss of old-growth forest
vested, the negative effects are cancelled, but if they are Benefits added to the GPI
used to fund consumption, the GPI drops. Value of household and parenting
Value of volunteer work
RESULTS Services of consumer durables
Services of highways and streets
Surveys carried out in the U.S. show that the Genuine
Net capital investment
Progress Index has stagnated since the 1970s, whereas
the GDP has increased. This means, according to the GIP Result
GPI logic, that growth is in fact a myth for what increa-
ses at one end strongly decreases at the other end. REFERENCE
www.rprogress.org
A study published by Redefining Progress in late 2001 www.rprogress.org/projects/gpi/
compares the North American GDP per capita evolu- www.redefiningprogress.org/projects/gpi/
tion in the last 50 years with the GPI figures. The fin- www.redefiningprogress.org/newpubs/2004/gpi_
dings suggest that although the North American per march2004update.pdf
capita GDP, in constant values, has increased by 79%
in this period, the index measured by the GPI rose only
2% in the same period. Measure of economic Economic Aspects
Welfare (MEW) of Welfare (EAW)
The organization provides the example of the use of oil Nordhaus and Tobin, 1972 Zolotas, 1981
for energy production. Its growing consumption incre-
ases the GDP, but reduces the GPI. That is because oil is
non-renewable, pollutes the environment and creates
health problems among other negative factors to the Index of Sustainable
well-being. Economic Welfare (ISEW)
Daly and Cobb, 1989
Example of the North American GPI calcula-
tion structure: from household expenses to the
GPI. (source: C.Cobb, M.Glickman Et C. Ches-
Genuine Progress
log: The Genuine Progress Indicator Update) Indicator (GPI)
Redefining Progress, 1995

65
 15 GSI

Genuine Saving OBJECTIVE

The indicator aims to denote the rate at which national

Indicator – GSI wealth (broadened to include natural capital and human

capital) is being created or destroyed. This indicator of
progress or setback to genuine savings aims to provide
World Bank a combined measure of a country’s sustainable develo-
pment by adding or subtracting several non-economic,
mainly environmental, resources from a basis formed by
the national savings.

Genuine savings = net savings (i.e., gross domestic sa-

vings – consumption of fixed capital) + Educational
expenditure – (energy depletion, mineral depletion, net
forest depletion, CO2 damage).
• The monetary assessment of exhaustible resource deposits
is based on the concept of supplementary net income that
estimates the difference between extraction values at world
prices and the total cost of production (including prospection).
It is the so-called resource rent. It remunerates both mine
owners (mines, wells, etc.) and extractors.
• For the carbon dioxide emissions, an estimate of the
marginal social cost by emitted ton, calculated as a
treatment cost, is used.
• Forest destruction is calculated based on stumpage
value (average logging cost) of the amount destined for
commercial use and for fuel, extracted beyond the limits of
natural growth.

Such rates are annually published in the World Bank

COUNTRY
Estados Unidos
WHAT IT IS
Genuine Savings is a simple indicator devised by World
Bank researchers to assess an economy’s sustainability.
ORIGIN
Environmental economists David Pearce and Giles
Atkinson first developed the principle of applying en-
vironmental accounting methods (*). However, it was
World Bank environmental economist Kirk Hamilton,
formerly with Statistics Canada and a PhD student of
David Pearce, who introduced the term “genuine sa-
ving” (**).
Indicators and used by countries in policy discussions.
(publications.worldbank.org/ecommerce/catalog/product?item_
id=5424413)
CONTENT
Genuine Savings defines a nation’s wealth more broadly
than orthodox national accounts, taking into account
accounting methodologies that include human and
environmental capital to estimate the net savings of a
country. The Genuine Saving Indi¬cator (GSI) measu-
res the value of the net change in the whole range of
assets that are important for development: produced
assets, natural resources, environmental quality, human
resources and foreign assets, thus showing whether the
economy is sustainable or not.
If the GSI is negative, the country’s welfare will decrea-
se and the development will be unsustainable.

(*) Capital Theory and the Measurement of Sustainable Development: an Indicator of Weak Sustainability’, in Ecological Economics, 8(2), 1993.
(**) Green Adjustments to GDP’ in Resources Policy 20 (3) 1994.

66
 GSI 15

If the GSI is positive, the quality of life will improve.

The indicator differs from standard national accounts

calculations in that they:
a) deduct the value of depletion of natural resources (where
forests, water and other assets are unsustainably managed);
b) deduct pollution damages, including lost welfare in the
form of human sickness and health;
c) treat current expenditure on education (on books,
teachers’ salaries, etc.) as saving rather than as
consumption, as it increases countries’ human capital;
d) deduct net foreign borrowing and add net official
transfers;
e) deduct the value of resource depletion.

The formula for genuine savings is given in World De-

velopment Indicators, World Bank, 1998, as the follo-
wing equation:

GDP – public and private consumption – Net foreign

borrowing – depreciation of produced assets + current
spending on education – resource depletion – pollution
damage.

The World Bank suggested further research “in the

field of Genuine Saving to include water as natural ca-
pital in the AGS concept”.
http://www.fz-juelich.de/ste/datapool/Preprint2005/Preprint-
2-2005.pdf (pg 6).

This document presents the new concept: Adjusted

Genuine Saving/Water, which considers water as na-
tural capital in a more strategic and explicit manner
in the following water depletion formula: Water rent:
(annual renewable water – annual water withdrawal)
x water price x rent rate. The Rent rate is calculated as
follows: rent rate = (market price of water – produc-
tion cost) / market price of water).

Referências
www.worldbank.org/
www.brettonwoodsproject.org/topic/environment/gensavings.
pdf (pg 3)

67
 16 HPI
The Happy Planet
Index – HPI
NEF
The New Economics Foundation
COUNTRY
UK
WHAT IT IS
It is an innovative new measure that shows the ecolo-
gical efficiency with which human well-being is delive-
red around the world (by a specific nation or group of
nations).
ORIGIN
NEF (the New Economics Foundation) was founded
in 1986 by the leaders of The Other Economic Summit
(TOES), which forced issues such as international debt
onto the agenda of the G7 and G8 summits.
As an independent think-and-do tank that inspires and
demonstrates real economic well-being, it aims to im-
prove quality of life by promoting innovative solutions
that challenge mainstream thinking on economic, envi-
ronment and social issues. It works in partnership and
puts people and the planet first.
NEF works with all sections of society in the UK and
internationally – civil society, government, individuals,
businesses and academia – to create more understan-
ding and strategies for change. It works on specific pro-
ject areas through practical pilots and tools for change,
in-depth research, campaigning, policy discussion.
The Happy Planet Index (HPI) was launched in July
2006 and NEF’s report, The Happy Planet Index: An
index of human well-being and environmental impact,
was published in association with the nonprofit institu-
tion Friends of the Earth.
68
OBJECTIVE
It is the first ever index to combine environmental impact
with well-being to measure the environmental efficiency
with which country by country, people live long and ha-
ppy lives. The results are surprising, even shocking, but
there is much to learn from what they show.
The HPI reflects the average years of happy life produced
by a given society, nation or group of nations per unit of
planetary resources consumed. Put another way, it re-
presents the efficiency with which countries convert the
earth’s finite resources into well-being experienced by
their citizens.
NOTE
HPI differs markedly from the central indicator of natio-
nal income usually used to measure its success – Gross
Domestic Product (GDP). And it also has a different ratio-
nale to the various alternative indicators that begin with
GDP, and then subtract social and environmental costs to
create a more accurate measure of economic success.
CONTENT
The Index does not reveal the ‘happiest’ country in the
world. It shows the relative efficiency with which na-
tions convert the planet’s natural resources into long
and happy lives for their citizens. The nations that top
the Index are not the happiest places in the world, but
those that score well show that achieving long, happy
lives without over-stretching the planet’s resources is
possible. The HPI shows that around the world, high
levels of resource consumption do not reliably produce
high levels of well-being (life satisfaction), and that it is
possible to produce high levels of well-being without
excessive consumption of the Earth’s resources. It also
reveals that there are different routes to achieving com-
parable levels of well-being. The model followed by the
West can provide widespread longevity and variable life
satisfaction, but it does so only at a vast and ultimately
counter-productive cost in terms of resource consump-
tion.
The Happy Planet Index (HPI) strips the view of the
economy back to its absolute basics: what we put in
(resources), and what comes out (human lives of di-
fferent length and happiness). The resulting Index of
the 178 nations for which data is available, reveals that
the world as a whole has a long way to go. In terms of
delivering long and meaningful lives within the Earth’s
environmental limits – all nations could do better. No
country achieves an overall ‘high’ score on the Index,
and no country does well on all three indicators.
No single country listed in the Happy Planet Index has

everything right. We have to acknowledge from the
start that, while some countries are more efficient than
others at delivering long, happy lives for their people,
every country has its problems and no country perfor-
ms as well as it could. Yet, fascinatingly, it is possible
to see patterns emerging that point to how we might
better achieve long and happy lives for all, whilst living
within our environmental means.
The challenge will be whether we can learn the lessons
of the HPI and apply them.
The index is built from three different indicators, two
of which are objective: life expectancy and the ecologi-
cal footprint – a measure of our use of environmental
goods and services. The third indicator is people’s sub-
jective well-being or “life satisfaction”. (Note that the
way people report their life satisfaction corresponds
to objective factors such as their mental and physical
health).
STEP BY STEP
How it is calculated:
The HPI incorporates three separate indicators: ecolo-
gical footprint, life satisfaction and life expectancy. The
statistical calculations that underlie the HPI are quite
complex. However, conceptually, it is straightforward
and intuitive:
Satisfação com a vida x expectativa de vida
HPI =
Pegada ecológica
The HPI is calculated by multiplying life expectancy by
life satisfaction. This result is then divided by the en-
vironmental impact of each country, including CO2
emissions.
RESULTS
The index was compiled for two months with the help
of data from the World Health Survey (UN), published
in 2003, the statistics of the World Database of Happi-
ness, 2005, and a research on consumption and envi-
ronmental impact carried out by World Footprint.
178 countries, whose information was available, parti-
cipate in the HPI ranking.
On a 0 to 100 scale, Vanuatu ranked first with an HPI
of 68.2, whereas the USA reached an HPI of 28.8 and
ranked 150th. The UK achieved HPI of 40.3 and was
ranked 108th. The Vanuatu islands residents live around
69 years, nearly eight years less than the North-Ameri-
cans and their per capita GDP is US$ 2,944, 13-fold less
HPI 16
than that of the USA. “People can live long and be ha-
ppy without having to use more than their fair share of
the planet’s natural resources”, according to the report
released on the foundation’s website.
Cuba and Vietnam, countries that represen¬ted the
“red scare” in the 1960s, are now happiness paradises,
ranking more than 100 positions above the USA.
According to the survey, the USA and Germany show
similar satisfaction and life expectancy levels, although
the Germans, who ranked 81st, have an “ecological re-
serve” or an area to support its population, half the size
of the USA’s.
Among the G8 members, Italy was the highest ranked
country, in the 66th position, whereas Russia was the
worst at 172nd, near the lowest ranking in the world.
Among the wealthy nations, Japan, Canada and France
ranked 95th, 111th, and 129th, respectively.
The Central American countries accounted for nine out
of the ten first positions of the happiest countries. The
African economies, including Swaziland and Equatorial
Guinea, are among the last ten.
Brazil ranked 63rd (HPI of 48.6), way behind Argenti-
na, 47th (HPI of 52.2). Colombia ranked 2nd (HPI of
67.2). The unhappiest country in the world, Zimbabwe,
ranked last (HPI of 16.6).
Based on these findings, NEF proposes a global ma-
nifesto for a happier planet. NEF highlights the policy
areas on which countries with low life expectancy, poor
life satisfaction or high ecological footprint must focus,
so that we can all live within our environmental limits
and increase well-being for all.
REFERENCE
www.neweconomics.org/gen
PDF: www.neweconomics.org/gen/uploads/dl44k145g5scuy
453044gqbu11072006194758.pdf
Calculate you own HPI
http://www.itint.co.uk/hpisurvey
69
 17 IDS

Sustainable OBJECTIVE

This set of information is valuable for understanding re-

Development levant themes regarding the country’s sustainable deve-

lopment. It allows interregional comparisons in Brazil,

Indicators – IDS as well as comparisons among countries, and indicates

needs and priorities for making and assessing develop-
ment policies.

IBGE CONTENT
Brazilian Institute of The latest version (2004) gathers 59 indicators, inclu-
Geography and Statistics ding 12 new ones regarding emerging issues, thus ena-
bling a more comprehensive assessment of the sustai-
nable development.
They are presented in four dimensions:
• Environmental: 22 indicators

• Social: 19 indicators

• Economic: 12 indicators

• Institutional: 6 indicators

The indicators refer to four guidelines:

• Equity: distributive aspects,

• Efficiency: rational use of resources,

• Adaptability: diversification, alternative production

processes;

Country • Attention to future generations: resources and economic,

Brazil
WHAT IT IS
Sustainable Development Indicators of Brazil providing
information on the Brazilian reality, including social, en-
vironmental, economic and institutional dimensionsl.
ORIGIN
The development of sustainable development indica-
tors in Brazil is part of the international efforts to con-
solidate ideas and principles set forth by the Agenda
21, adopted at the United Nations Conference on En-
vironment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in
1992, regarding environment, development and deci-
sion-making infor¬mation.
First developed in 2002, it follows the guidelines pro-
posed by the Commission on Sustainable Development
(UNCSD).
ecological and human assets for future generations.
They provide, within the environmental dimension, in-
formation on the use of natural resources and environ-
mental degradation, organized in the following themes:
atmosphere, land, fresh water, oceans and coastal areas,
biodiversity and sanitation.
ENVIRONMENTAL DIMENSION
01 - Industrial consumption of ozone-depleting substances
02 – Concentration of air emissions in urban areas
03 – Use of fertilizers
04 – Use of pesticides
05 – Agrosylvopastoral systems
06 – Forest burning and fire
07 – Deforestation in the Legal Amazon
08 – Remnant area and deforestation in the Rain Forest and
coastal vegetation formations
09 – Desertification and drought
10 – Quality of inland waters
11 – Bathing quality of the beaches

70

12 – Marine and continental fish production
13 – Coastal areas population
14 – Extinct and endangered species
15 – Protected areas
16 – Wildlife traffic, breeding and trade
17 – Invasive species
18 – Access to residential waste collection services
19 – Final waste disposal
20 – Access to water supply system
21 – Access to sewage system
22 – Sewage treatment
As for the social dimension, the indicators address
themes such as population, labor and income, health,
education, housing, and safety, all of them related to
human needs satisfaction, quality of life improvement,
and social justice.
SOCIAL DIMENSION
23 - Population growth rate
24 – Indigenous population and land
25 – Gini Index on income distribution
26 – Unemployment rate
27 – Per capita family income
28 – Average monthly income
29 – Life expectancy at birth
30 – Infant mortality rate
31 – Total malnutrition prevalence
32 – Immunization against infectious diseases in children
33 – Contraceptive methods use rate
34 – Basic health care provision
35 – Environmental sanitation-related diseases
36 – Schooling rate
37 – Literacy rate
38 – Schooling
39 – Adequate housing
40 – Homicide rate
41 – Coefficient of mortality from transport accidents
The indicators’ economic dimension seeks to portray
the macroeconomic and financial performance,
impacts on material resources consumption, and
energy use by addressing the themes economic
outlook and production and consumption patterns.
ECONOMIC DIMENSION
42 - Gross domestic product per capita
43 – Investment rate
IDS 17
44 – Trade balance
45 – Degree of indebtedness
46 – Energy consumption per capita
47 – Energy intensity
48 – Share of renewable sources in energy supply
49 – Mineral consumption per capita
50 – Useful life of mineral reserves
51 – Recycling
52 – Selective waste collection
53 – Radioactive nuclear waste: generation and storage
The institutional dimension, on its turn, broken into
the themes institutional framework and institutional
capacity, provides information on political orienta-
tion, ca¬pacity and efforts made towards the neces-
sary changes for the implementation of sustainable
development.
INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSION
54 - Ratification of global agreements
55 – Existence of local councils
56 – Research & development expenditure
57 – Public expenditure on environmental protection
58 – Access to telephone services
59 – Access to Internet
The indicators are presented in tables, charts and maps,
whose variables used in their construction, the rationale
and, in some specific cases, methodological comments
were previously described in a form. The end of the pu-
blication brings a glossary of terms used, and includes
information on history, the country, the states and, when
possible, follow up and analysis of phenomena taking
place in the country along time.
The current version presents an additional matrix of re-
lationships between indicators, which shows the links
among these data, a chart providing an indicators over-
view and a list of indicators according to guidelines for
the transition to sustainable development, with referen-
ce to equity, efficiency, adaptability and attention to fu-
ture generations.
Information is available in the CD-ROM that accompa-
nies the publication.
Referências:
www.ibge.gov.br
www.ibge.gov.br/home/geociencias/recursosnaturais/ids/
default.shtm
71
18 IEWB

Index of Economic OBJECTIVE

This index of economic well-being, more realistic

Well-being – IEWB and comprehensive than the GDP2, aims to help the
in¬dividuals of a society to evaluate and decide whe-
ther the decisions and public policy adopted in one
Centre for the Study country can bring effective societal improvements.

The goal of the IEWB is not to summarize the economic

of Living Standards well-being of society in a single objective figure, but to
provide a well-organized and manageable set of objec-
tive data which individual analysts can use to come to
a summative judgment of social outcomes, i.e. to give
individuals a way to “add it all up” and come to their
own conclusions.

Well-being has multiple dimensions, and individuals

may have different subjective weightings of the compo-
nents of economic well-being because they have diffe-
rent personal values. Considering that individuals are
called to exercise their personal choices on themes that
affect the society as a whole (such as voting), an index
like this can help citizens assess other collective issues
– such as answering whether or not a given public po-
licy may bring effective benefits to society.

CONTENT

The IEWB was developed from the acknowledgement

COUNTRY
Canada
WHAT IT IS
ÍIndex aimed at measuring the economic component of
social well-being in a more realistic and comprehensive
way than traditional indices, such as the GDP.
ORIGIN
Developed in 1998 by the Centre for the Study of Living
Standards1 IEBW was based on a paper written by Lars
Osberg for the MacDonald Commission entitled The
Measurement of Economic Welfare.
that one of the key components of well-being is the
economic well-being or the “access to economic re-
sources”. However, the criteria traditionally used to
measure economic progress, such as GDP per capita,
assume that some representative agents can define
well-being of the society as a whole and consider only
the present income flows, without distinguishing be-
tween present consumption flows and accumulation of
assets that will guarantee future consumption flows.
The index consists of a weighted average of four com-
bined indicators on consumption flows, wealth (eco-
nomic, human and environmental), inequalities and
economic security (within a present and future pers-
pective). Each component (with a 25% weight) articu-
lates data regarding national accounts and social statis-
tics. They are the following:

(1) A non-profit, national, independent organization that seeks to contribute to a better understanding of trends in and determinants of productivity, living standards and
economic and social well-being through research.
(2) For the Centre for Study of Living Standards, GDP measures consumption incompletely, ignoring the value of leisure and longer life spans, and it also ignores the
value of accumulation for future generations. Furthermore, since it is an average, GDP per capita gives neither indication of the likelihood that an individual will share in
prosperity nor the degree of anxiety with which individuals contemplate their futures.

72
 IEWB 18

1) Effective per capita consumption flows, including

consumption of marketed goods and services; gover-
nment services; effective per capita flows of household
production; leisure; and changes in life span.

2) Net societal accumulation of stocks of productive re-

sources, including net accumulation of tangible capital;
housing stocks; net changes in the value of natural re-
sources stocks; environmental costs; net changes in the
level of foreign indebtedness; accumulation of human
capital; and the stock of R&D investment.

3) Income distribution, including the intensity of poverty

(incidence and depth) and the inequality of income.

4) Economic security from job loss and unemployment,

illness, family breakup, and poverty in old age.

The overall IEWB is calculated as the weighted average

of the four scaled components, with aggregation weight
determined subjectively according to individual views
on relative importance of each.

Dimensions of Economic Well-being or Command over Resouces

Concept Present Future

“Typical Citizen” or
“Representative Agent”
Heterogeneity of
Experiences of all Citizens
Average Flow of Current Aggregate Accumulation
Income of Productive Stocks
Distribuition of Potential
Insecurity of Future
Consuption - Income
Incomes
Inequality and Poverty

RESULTS

The index was calculated for Canada, United States and

some OECD member countries. Complete results can
be accessed at: www.csls.ca/iwb.asp.

REFERENCE
www.csls.ca/iwb/macdonald.pdf
www.csls.ca/iwb.asp
www.csls.ca/iwb/iewb-guide.pdf

73
19 IPRS
São Paulo State
Social Responsibility
Index
Seade Foundation
COUNTRY
Brazil
WHAT IT IS
The IPRS is a system of social and economic indicators
of each municipality of the State of São Paulo aimed at
providing information for the development and asses-
sment of public policy created to help develop the sta-
te mu¬nicipalities. It is not an ordinary development,
but one the society participates in and benefits from
in search of better governmental economic and social
balance.
ORIGIN
The Seade Foundation was commissioned by the São
Paulo State Capitol, at the São Pau¬lo Forum, in 2000,
to develop an indicator to measure human development
in all state municipalities. The indicator should provide
a detailed portrait of the State of São Paulo regarding
development, sharing the same belief as the Human
Development Index (HDI) that human development is
a complex process that should consider social and qua-
lity of life dimensions alongside economic aspects. An
74
indicator was then developed aimed at identifying the
development stage of a particular municipality conside-
ring the three HDI dimensions: income, schooling and
longevity.
During the publicity work carried out in 2003, main-
ly during regional meetings, attended by over 3 thou-
sand people, comments and suggestions were made to
improve the variables and indices that comprise the
IPRS. Through the Legislative Forum for Sustainable
Economic Development, the State Capitol, together
with the Seade Foundation, promo¬ted a series of de-
bates with technicians and specialists in economics,
health and education, aiming to improve both the IPRS
methodolo¬gy and applicability.
OBJECTIVE
The current version, based on 2002 data, provides a
portrait of the social and economic situation of the mu-
nicipalities, their recent history and main challenges, as
well as analyses and com¬parisons of the index evolu-
tion in each State municipality or region regarding we-
alth generation and impact on its social indicators.
CONTENT
The IPRS is composed of four indicators: three com-
bined sectoral indicators (*), which measure the cur-
rent conditions of a municipality regarding income,
schooling and longevity – allowing a ranking of the 645
São Paulo State municipalities according to each one
of these dimensions; and a typology composed of five
groups called IPRS groups (**), which summarizes the
municipalities’ situation according to the three axes,
but without ranking them.
The three combined indicators are presented on a scale
ranging from 0 to 100, in a linear combination of a set
of specific variables. The weighting structure was achie-
ved following a factorial analysis model to study the in-
terdependency level among the different variables.
(*) THREE COMBINED SECTORAL INDICATORS:
I Municipal Wealth
• CResidential electric energy consumption
• Agriculture, commerce and services electric energy
consumption
• Average wage of formally employed and public sector
workers
• VAF (a local tax-related economic health index) per capita
II Longevity
• Perinatal mortality
 IPRS 19

• Infant mortality more detailed view of the municipality, identifying the

• Mortality of people aged 15 to 39 areas of significant poverty concentration.
• Mortality of people over 60
REFERENCE
III Schooling
www.seade.gov.br/produtos/iprs/
• Percentage of teenagers aged 15 - 17 who completed
www.seade.gov.br/produtos/iprs/pdf/metodologia.pdf
middle school
www.seade.gov.br/produtos/iprs/pdf/informativo.pdf
• Percentage of teenagers aged 15 - 17 with at least four
years of schooling
• Percentage of teenagers aged 18 - 19 who completed
high school
• Percentage of children aged 5 - 6 who attend pre-school
(**) TYPOLOGY MADE OF FIVE IPRS GROUPS:
Group 1: municipalities showing high wealth level and good
social indicators levels.
Group 2: municipalities which, although showing high
wealth level, do not have good social indicators.
Group 3: municipalities showing low wealth level, but good
indicators in the other dimensions.
Group 4: municipalities showing low wealth level and
intermediate longevity and/or schooling levels.
Group 5: deprived municipalities, both in terms of wealth
and social indicators.

RESULTS

The São Paulo State Social Responsibility Index has

already had two editions, in 2000 and 2003. In 2000,
results from 1992 and 1997 were presented and, in
2003, regarding the year 2000. The 2004 edition, which
presents the 2002 results, incorpora¬ted some changes
aimed at its improvement as an effective tool for asses-
sing and monitoring public policy. Such changes caused
the need to redo the 2000 IPRS indicators, in order to
allow comparisons between 2000 and 2002. Therefore,
all results presented already have the methodologi¬cal
changes, thus expressing the reality of 2002.

Note
By ranking the State of São Paulo municipalities accor-
ding to different development levels, the IPRS do not
fully answer questions concerning existing equity and
poverty in the referred locations. This is because, even
in better positioned municipalities within the groups,
particularly the larger ones such as São Pau¬lo and
Campinas, there are portions of their territories with
large segments of population exposed to different con-
ditions of social vulnerability. From this realization, the
Seade Foundation and the State Capitol created the
IPVS – Índice Paulista de Vulnerabilidade Social (State
of São Paulo Social Vulnerability Index), which allows a

75
20 ISEW
Index of Sustainable
Economic Welfare
ISEW
Friends of The Earth
CES
Centre for Environmental Strategy
NEF
The New Economics Foundation
COUNTRY
United Kingdom
WHAT IT IS
It is a monetary index aimed at replacing the GDP as a
measure of nations’ progress, going far beyond the total
measure of economic activities for it takes into account
the extent to which national policies truly lead to better
quality of life for all.
ORIGIN
Friends of the Earth is working with the Centre for
Environmental Strategy (CES) , the New Economics
Foundation (NEF) and others to put forward alternative
economic indicators to GDP. The most advanced is the
Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW), which
has been calculated for 9 countries, and has just been
revised in the UK by CES, NEF and Friends of the Earth.
The index is based on the ideas presented by Nordhaus
and Tobin in their Measure of Economic Welfare. It
was first coined in 1989 by Daly and Cobb. They later
went on to add several other “costs” to the definition of
ISEW.
76
OBJECTIVE
The ISEW is one of the most advanced attempts to
create an indicator of economic welfare – a more sui-
table social well-being index than the GDP (merely a
gross tally of products and services bought and sold,
which badly reflects people’s well-being), that allows
comparisons between countries through a homoge-
neous methodology.
It is an attempt to measure the portion of economic
activity which delivers genuine increases in our qua-
lity of life – in a sense, “quality” economic activity.
For example, it makes a subtraction for air pollution
caused by economic activity, and makes an addition
to count unpaid household labor – such as cleaning
or child-minding. It also covers areas such as income
inequality, other environmental damage, and deple-
tion of environmental assets.
The Index creators believe the ISEW or an equivalent
should be one of the main economic indicators in the
Government’s Indicators strategy.
CONTENT
The ISEW, Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare, me-
asures a nation’s economic performance based on 20
indicators, aggregating conventional measures — such
as capital investment growth — with social and envi-
ronmental elements — such as, for instance, income
distribution, household labor, air and water pollution,
agriculture soil degradation and loss of natural resour-
ces. In other words, it includes distributive economic
issues and a series of environmental and social variables
of great im¬portance to the aggregated well-being.
Instead of simply adding up all expenses, like in the
GDP, consumption expenditure is offset by factors such
as income distribution and pollution-related costs, as
well as other economically unsustainable costs. Natio-
nal progress calculation takes into account the econo-
mic, political and social activities’ negative contribu-
tions (social and environmental costs related to income
inequality, pollution, noise, loss of natural capital, non-
renewable resources depletion; ozone depletion, etc.)
and positive contributions (household labor and public
expenditure on health and education).
In general terms, the ISEW can be defined by the follo-
wing formula:
 ISEW 20

ISEW = personal consumption + public expenditure not Chilean ISEW

related to defense and safety.
1000000
- private expenditure on safety

Pesos per capita 1990 prices

+ capital formation 800000
+ household labor services
600000
- costs of environmental degradation
- natural capital depreciation
400000

RESULTS 200000
Besides the United States, the Daly and Cobb methodo-
0
logy has been adopted in countries like the Netherlands,
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
United Kingdom, Austria, Australia, Ita¬ly, Switzerland,
Germany and Chile, A common trend has been noticed
for all countries: national welfare has diverged from the GDP ISEW
GDP since 1970.
Calculations based on the new index showed that, whi-
le the North American GDP increased substantially
between 1950 and 1985 (measured by the traditional Swedish ISEW

formula), the ISEW has remained the same since 1970. 1000000
According to Daly & Cobb Jr. (1989), as natural capital
SEK per capita (1985 prices)

stock degradation, pollution-related costs, and perverse 75000

effects of income inequality are taken into account, the
North American economy is not regarded as having re-
ached substantial welfare improvements. 50000

This evidence is critical not only for the U.S. but for any
country concerned with inaccuracies regarding growth 25000
accounts performed exclusively in economic terms, that
is, disregarding environmental degradation. In the event 0
a country ignores deductions on its natural capital stock, 1950 1960 1970 1980 1995 2000
substantial welfare losses could be incurred even if tradi-
tional measures would point to substantial improvements. GDP ISEW

EXAMPLES
Italian ISEW
1000000 TIP
Lire (m) per capita (1985 prices)

800000 Friends of Earth has developed a tool, available on the

Internet at www.foe.org, which allows anyone to create
600000 their own ISEW (Index of Sustainable Economic Wel-
fare), valuing the variables as adequately as possible to
400000 each situation. Friends of the Earth: http://www.foe.
co.uk
200000

0 REFERENCE
1960 1970 1980 1990 www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/sustainable_development/progress

GDP ISEW
Book: Herman Daly & John Cobb, Jr - “For the Common
Good: Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, the
Environment, and a Sustainable Future,” 1989, Beacon
Press, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

77
 21 ISH

Index Social
CHILDREN
• Infant mortality

Health – ISH
• Child abuse
• Child poverty

YOUTH

Institute for Innovation • Teenage suicide

• Teenage drug abuse
in Social Policy • High school dropouts
• Teenage pregnancy

ADULTS
• Unemployment
• Wages
• Health insurance coverage

ELDERLY
• Poverty, ages 65 and over
• Life expectancy over 85

ALL AGES
• Homicides
COUNTRY • Alcohol-related traffic fatalities
• Affordable housing
USA
• Income inequality

WHAT IT IS
A composite index that aggregates multiple social va-
riables of the U.S.A.
ORIGIN
The index was developed by Marc and Marque-Luisa
Miringoff in the mid 1980s, and has been under the res-
ponsibility of the Fordham Institute for Innovation in
Social Policy of Fordham University, Tarrytown, New
York since 1987.
OBJECTIVE
The premise of the Index is that American life is revea-
led not by any single social issue, but by the combined
effect of many issues, acting on each other. In looking at
social problems that affect Americans at each stage of
life – childhood, youth, adulthood, and the elderly – as
well as problems that affect all ages, the Index seeks to
provide a comprehensive view of the social health of
the nation.
CONTENT
RESULTS
As of 1973, the GDP and ISH became no longer equiva-
lents. The GDP continues to increase, whereas the ISH
plummets strongly and permanently.
Five indicators have improved since 1970: infant mor-
tality, high school dropouts, poverty, ages 65 and over,
homicides, and alcohol-related traffic fatalities.
Eleven indicators have worsened since 1970: child abu-
se, child poverty, teenage suicide, teenage drug abuse,
unemployment, wages, health insurance coverage, out-
of-pocket health costs, ages 65 and over, food stamp
coverage, affordable housing, and income inequality.
In 2004, the latest year full data was available, the ISH
stood at 54 out of a possible score of 100, the lowest
score since 1998. Between 1970 and 2004, the index
worsened from 69.2 to 54.0, a drop of 22%.
REFERENCE
iisp.vassar.edu/ish.html
M & M-L Miringoff., the social Health of the Nation: how
America is really doing? (NY Oxford University Press 1999)

The Index is calculated from 16 social variables, grou-

ped in five age groups, as follows:

78

Living Planet Index
WWF
COUNTRY
Switzerland
WHAT IT IS
The Living Planet Index, developed by the WWW Ne-
twork, is a measure of the state of the world’s biodiver-
sity based on trends from 1970 to 2003 in over 3,600
populations of more than 1,300 vertebrate species from
around the world, of which 695 are terrestrial species,
274 marine species, and 344 freshwater species.
ORIGIN
WWF is the world’s largest environmental network.
Formed by independent and similar organizations in 40
countries, the network has almost 5 million supporters. It
is present in one hundred countries in the five continents.
WWF-Brazil is part of the network and is a civil society
organization, recognized by the government as a public
interest institution. Created in 1996 and based in Brasília,
the WWF-Brazil covers all the country with the objecti-
ve of helping the Brazilian society to preserve Nature and
harmonize human activities with biodiversity conserva-
tion also for the benefit of future generations.
OBJECTIVE
The Living Planet Index is an indicator of the overall
state of the planet’s ecosystems, which includes natio-
nal and global data of consumption of these natural re-
sources and the increase in pollution effects. The first
measures, in 1999, took into account three indicators of
the state of natural ecosystems:
1) The planet’s area covered by forests;
2) Populations of freshwater species;
3) Populations of marine species;
Each one of these indices was measured in percentage,
in 1970, and was given a weight.
CONTENT
Separate indices are produced for terrestrial, marine
and freshwater species, and the three trends are then
LPI 22
averaged to create an aggregated index. Although ver-
tebrates represent only a fraction of known species, it
is assumed that trends in their populations are typical
of biodiversity overall.
By tracking wild species, the Living Planet Index is also
monitoring the health of ecosystems.
• Terrestrial life in the planet – populations of 695 repre-
sentative terrestrial species are tracked to calculate the
Terrestrial Living Planet Index. This index shows us the
status of populations of terrestrial species in compari-
son to what it was in 1970, calculated in percentage.
• Marine life in the planet – populations of 274 repre-
sentative marine species are tracked to calculate the
Marine Living Planet Index. This index shows us the
current health of marine environment in 4 oceans as
compared to 1970.
• Freshwater life in the planet – population of 344 repre-
sentative freshwater species (287 in temperate zones
and 51 in tropical zones) are tracked to calculate the
Freshwater Living Planet Index. This index shows us
the current health of the world’s freshwater ecosystems
as compared to 1970.
RESULTS
The Living Planet Report 2006 pulls together various data
to compile two indicators of the Earth’s well-being. The
first one is the Living Planet Index, and the second index,
the Ecological Footprint, measures humanity’s demand
on the biosphere (how many hectares a person needs to
produce what he/she consumes per year).
This biennial WWF report showed essentially that the
decline in global biodiversity between 1970 and 2003
was 30%. “Humanity is no longer living off Nature’s inte-
rest, but drawing down its capital”, states the report. “At
this level of ecological deficit, exhaustion of ecological
assets and large-scale ecosystem collapse become incre-
asingly likely.”
• Terrestrial species declined by 31% between 1970 and
2003.
• Marine species fell by 27% in the average of the four
oceans between 1970 and 2003.
• Freshwater species dropped 28% between 1970 and
2003.
The information shows several trends, indicating that
there is a clear difference between developed and deve-
loping countries. Brazil, for instance, is on the average
of global consumption, but even so Brazilians consume
more than the planet could bear.
REFERENCE
assets.wwf.org.br/downloads/wwf_brasil_planeta_vivo_2006.pdf
www.wwf.org.br
www.panda.org/
79
23 RCI
Responsible
Competitiveness
Index – RCI
Accountability
COUNTRY
United Kingdom
WHAT IT IS
It is an index that builds the relationship between the
state of corporate responsibility and the competitive-
ness of nations.
ORIGIN
In order to develop the index, AccountAbility, an interna-
tional organi¬zation based in London that works to make
companies more transparent about their impacts on pe-
ople and the planet, first diagnosed the state of corporate
responsibility in 80 countries by assessing criteria such as
cor¬ruption, environmental management and corporate
governance in each one. The research drew on the World
Economic Forum’s Growth Competitiveness Index, which
defines competitiveness as the ability of a country to rea-
ch medium and long-term sustainable growth, to produce
the Responsible Competitiveness Index.
The innovative National Corporate Responsibility Index
and Responsible Competitiveness Index were developed
from a Global Policy Dialogue on Responsible Competi-
tiveness, carried out in 2004, in association with the UN
Global Compact and partners from Africa, Asia, Europe
and Latin America.
Production of this Responsible Competitiveness report
80
was coordinated by AccountAbility with the support of
Rockefeller Brothers Fund in association with Fundação
Dom Cabral (Dom Cabral Foundation), the UN Global
Compact and partners from Africa, Asia, Europe and La-
tin America.
OBJECTIVE
Disclosing which countries are achieving sustainable
economic growth based on responsible business prac-
tices.
CONTENT
The Responsible Competitiveness Index provides me-
tric and methodology for exploring the relationship
between corporate responsibility and competitiveness,
and includes the National Corporate Responsibility In-
dex that measures the national state of corporate res-
ponsibility covering 85 countries across five continents,
based on criteria that include the level of corruption,
civil freedom, corporate governance, and environmen-
tal management to set the global ranking.
RESULTS
Responsible Competitiveness’s findings are based on a
wealth of sector and issue-specific cases from Brazil,
Cambodia, Chile, Europe and South Africa, two new
innovative country-level indices, and findings emerging
from a Global Policy Dialogue on Responsible Compe-
titiveness conducted over two years in association with
the UN Global Compact and partners from Africa,
Asia, Europe and Latin America.
The latest issue of the report “Responsible Competiti-
veness: Reshaping Global Markets Through Responsi-
ble Business Practices – Latin America”, presents the
results of studies carried out with the Responsible
Competitiveness Index and the National Corporate
Responsibility Index (NCRI) “. This report, launched in
late 2006, results from the collaborative effort of Ac-
countAbility, FDC and Incae, and the generous support
of the Business Forum and Fundemas. The study is ba-
sed on a wealth of sector and issue-specific cases from
Bolivia, Brazil, Central America and Chile, as well as
other countries and regions.
The report assesses the Latin American progress towar-
ds the responsible competitiveness goal. Realizing this
goal requires markets and regulation that create a “race
to the top” of escalating productivity, human develo-
pment and environmental responsibility. The potential

exists for such positive relationship, but a competition
driven “race to the bottom” remains a very real possi-
bility.
Latin America faces a unique set of competitiveness
challenges. The latest competitiveness indices show
that, while some countries in the region have rapidly
improved their medium-term growth potential, others
remain static or even show signs of worsening in com-
parison to their competitors. The facts of pervasive po-
verty and inequality suggest that the “trickle down” of
undirected economic growth will not deliver sustaina-
ble development on its own. What is required is a more
responsible form of competitiveness.
Latin American countries have advanced towards cor-
porate responsibility. In this sense, Latin America’s
progress is uneven and varies from intermediate to the
lowest levels among the 85 countries that comprise the
data.
The main findings of the National Corporate Respon-
sibility Index are:
• Nordic countries score well. Although Norway is an
exception (12th), the other Scandinavian countries rank
among the five top ones (Sweden, first; Finland, second; and
Denmark, fourth)
• South Africa is the highest ranking emerging economy
(excluding Eastern Europe), followed closely by Korea, Chile,
Malaysia, Costa Rica and Thailand.
• China ranks 66, whereas India, its major Asian competitor,
ranks above, at 43.
• There are no Latin American countries in the upper third of
the Index.
• The regional leaders, Chile (29) and Costa Rica (32), are
among the top countries in the upper third.
• There is an intermediate group of countries, in which Brazil
(37), Panama (47), El Salvador (50) and Mexico (54) are
included.
• The third group of Latin American countries is placed in the
lower third of the global ranking. 10 out of 18 countries from
this region included in the ranking are in this group.
Advancing responsible competitiveness requires the de-
velopment of actions in several fronts:
1. Strategy-aligned corporate responsibility
2. Collaborative approaches to raising the bar
3. Sector-based strategies, including medium-sized and
small companies
4. National and regional strategies to build on multi-sector
synergies
5. Investor responsiveness
RCI 23
6. Trade, investment and competition rules need to be
sensitized
7. Responsibility standards need to be better aligned with
competitiveness opportunities
CAs shown in this report, Latin America has good
examples in each area, but there is a lot to be done.
The report illustrates how strategies rooted in Res-
ponsible Competitiveness can play a significant role in
enhancing a country’s economic competitiveness. Ba-
sed on these practices, governments worldwide, as well
as businesses, will increasingly build responsibility is-
sues into their strategies to develop and maintain their
national competitiveness.
RESPONSIBLE COMPETITIVENESS...
Predicts that governments worldwide, as well as busi-
nesses, will increasingly build responsibility issues into
their strategies to develop and maintain their national
competitiveness. It provides a robust policy framework
for this purpose and proposals for both policy and re-
search.
Responsible Competitiveness is the precondition for
an acceptable, viable globalization that aligns the ex-
tension of business opportunities and roles in develo-
pment with reductions in poverty and inequality, and
environmental security.
In 2007, AccountAbility and its partners will launch a
new Responsible Competitiveness Report to monitor
regional and worldwide progress.
REFERENCE
www.accountability21.net
www.accountability21.net/uploadstore/cms/docs/Competitivi
dade%20Responsavel.pdf
Relatório 2006 (Am. Latina)
• Sumário: www.accountability21.net/research/default.
asp?pageid=242
• Íntegra: www.accountability21.net/uploadstore/cms/docs/
Competitividad%20Responsable.pdf
81
 23 RCI

RANKINGS COMPARISONS, GROWTH COMPETITIVENESS INDEX (GCI) AND

NATIONAL CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY INDEX (NCRI)

90
Latin America
Emerging countries
Other
80

70

Argentina
Dominican Republic
60 Peru Russia
Colombia

50 Panama
GCI Ranking

Brazil
India Uruguay

Costa Rica El Salvador

40 Mexico
China

30

20
Chile

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

NCRI Ranking

82

Social Footprint
CSI
Center for Sustainable Innovation
Universidade de Groningen
COUNTRY
USA and the Netherlands
WHAT IT IS
It is a measurement and reporting system that organi-
zations can use to assess, manage, and report their im-
pacts on people and society in a broad range of areas.
ORIGIN
The SF is the product of a joint development effort be-
tween the Center for Sustainable Innovation and the
University of Groningen in the Netherlands. A cor-
porate sustainability accounting method that makes
it possible to measure and report on its non-financial,
multi-bottom line impacts.
The CSI is a non-profit corporation created in 2004 by
its founder, Mark W. McElroy. Its purpose is to con-
duct research, development, training, and consulting
for, and with, companies around the world interested
in achieving sustainability in the conduct of human
affairs, especially their own. The organization is parti-
cularly interested in promoting sustainability as social
learning.
OBJECTIVE
It is a measurement and reporting tool that quantifies
the social sustainability of an organization. What really
differentiates the Social Footprint from other sustainabi-
lity reporting tools is that it is the first quantitative tool
for calculating social bottom lines based on rigorous sus-
tainability theory.
SF 24
CONTENT
The Social Footprint is a measurement and reporting
tool that quantifies an organization’s social impact on
people, or on what CSI calls anthro capital – a combi-
nation of social capital, human capital and construc-
ted capital (i.e., material things that humans produce
in order to meet their needs, such as food, health and
housing).
In this way, the Social Footprint deals with the impacts
on capital produced by people and that can be grown
virtually at will (anthro capital), unlike the Ecological
Footprint, which measures human use and impact on
natural or ecological capital, which is limited and whi-
ch humans do not create. The tool allows balancing the
use of natural resources and social demands.
The CSI measures organizational sustainability in terms
of Ecological Bottom Lines and Social Bottom Li¬nes.
For this purpose, it has developed a methodology that
defines mathematical quotients for the two aspects –
Ecological Quotient and Societal Quotient. These quo-
tients compare a particular behavior or action to their
impacts on ecological capital (limited and not created
by man) and anthro capital (unlimited and created by
man).
STEP BY STEP
SOCIAL BOTTOM LINES
They are measures of social behavior sustainability – col-
lective organizational behavior in particular. They result
in numerical “social bottom lines” or scores and take the
form of quotients:
- The denominator expresses the per capita or per-
organization share of gaps in social conditions required for
human well-being.
- OThe numerator expresses actual per capita or per-
organization contributions to closing or creating this gap.
- Quotients less than 1 are unsustainable.
Calculating a Social Bottom Line –
A 5-step Process
1. Determine overall amount of anthro capital needed, and
divide by total population in geographical area of interest
(i.e., to arrive at a per capita share of what it would cost
to create or supply the required capital in a particular
geography) – expressible in dollars “per person” or per
“People Foot”1.
2. Calculate number of People Feet1 associated with the
social system under analysis (e.g., an adjusted employee
headcount that reflects the proportion of time workers span
83
 24 SF

in their lives actually working, or at work).
3. Multiply the per capita need calculated in Step 1 by the
number of People Feet in the social system of interest per
Step 2. This is the social system’s (e.g., an organization)
“Own Share of Supply Needs for Anthro Capital” – often
expressible in monetary terms.
4. Measure the size of the social system’s contributions or
impacts in the anthro capital area of interest. This is the
entity’s “Total Social Imprint” (i.e., the numerator in the
Societal Quotient) – also expressible in monetary terms.
5. Divide the numerator by the denominator. This results in
the Societal Quotient (SQ), which is a social system’s Social
Bottom Line in the anthro capital area of interest.
Measuring Organizational Sustainability: Measuring
Social and Ecological Bottom Lines.
natural capital use (or its services), such as the Ecological
Footprint’s notion of ecologically productive land (in global
hectares) used per annum by a society.
• The denominator reflects an organization’s proportionate
share of the rate of the same natural capital/services
production and/or renewal in the ecology, also expressible in
terms of global hectares per annum, or some other measure.
• Quotients less than or equal to 1 (≤1) are sustainable
because usage rates either match or fall below natural
capital/services production and/or renewal rates (i.e., the
use of natural capital falls within its bounds of renewal).
• Quotients greater than 1 (>1) are unsustainable because
usage or impact rates exceed the production and/or renewal
rates of natural capital/services, thereby diminishing, and
possibly depleting, stocks of natural capital/services over
time (i.e., the use of natural capital exceeds its bounds of
renewal).

ECOLOGICAL BOTTOM LINES

• The numerator reflects an organization’s rate of some

QUOTIENTS AS MEASURES OF SUSTAINABILITY

Ecological Total Ecological Imprint - The lower better

_________________________ = Ecological Quotient - EQ 1 is sustainable
Bottom
(EQ) - EQ > 1 is unsustainable
Lines* Own Share of Supply
of Natural Capital

Social Total Social Imprint Societal Quotient - The higher better

Bottom _________________________ = (SQ), or what we call - SQ 1 is sustainable
Lines* Own Share of Supply The Social Footprint - SQ < 1 is unsustainable
Gaps in Anthro capital1

Organizational Societal
Sustaintability Ecological - If true, then sustainable
are 1 AND Quotients are 1
Defined Quotients EQ - If untrue, then unsustainable
SQ

* We take the position that there are many Ecological Bottom Lines and many Social Bottom Lines, each corresponding to impacts on some aspect of ecological and/or
anthro capital, respectively. So-called Economic Bottom Lines are merely types of Social Bottom Lines, and the Financial Bottom Line has nothing to do with any of this.

SOCIAL FOOTPINT X ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINTS RESULTS

The Social Footprint and the Ecological Footprint are
alike in the sense that both are about closing gaps – but
the similarity ends there. In the case of the Ecological
Footprint, the gaps of interest to us are between re-
sources used and resources available; in the case of the
Social Footprint, the gaps of interest to us are between
resources required and the supply of resources we have
decided to make available.
The organization requests that comments and assess-
ments be sent to Mark W. McElroy at mmcelroy@ver-
montel.net.
Referências
www.sustainableinnovation.org
www.sustainableinnovation.org/the-social-footprint.html
www.sustainableinnovation.org/Global-Warming-Footprint.pdf
www.sustainableinnovation.org/Recasting-TBL.pdf

1 People Feet (PF) is a metrical unit that is mainly used to specify the denominator in a sustainability quotient.

84

The Well-being
of Nations
IDRC
The International Research Centre
IUCN
World Conservation Union
COUNTRY
Canada
WHAT IT IS---
A new analysis of the state of the world – a survey that
ranks 180 countries by measuring human development
and environmental conservation through the Wellbeing
Assessment method.
ORIGIN
The Wellbeing Assessment, a method used in The
Well-being of Nations, was developed and tested with
the support of the International Development Research
Centre (IDRC) and IUCN – The World Conservation
Union. It began as a synthesis of several sustainability
assessment approaches, including Prescott-Allen’s Ba-
rometer of Sustainability method.
These approaches were tested and improved during the
first phase (1994-1996), and then Prescott-Allen deve-
loped the method for the second phase of the IUCN/
IDRC project (1997-99) and The Wellbeing of Nations.
Additional tests of the Barometer of Sustainability and
the complete method have been conducted in Canada,
India, Nicaragua, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
OBJECTIVE
It is intended to promote high levels of human and ecosys-
tem well-being, demonstrate the practicality and poten-
tial of the Wellbeing Assessment method, and encourage
countries, communities, and corporations to undertake
their own well-being assessments.
It is also intended to raise awareness about the need for
simultaneously planning and managing both human de-
velopment and ecosystem protection.
CONTENT
36 indicators of health, population, wealth, education,
communication, freedom, peacefulness, crime, and
equity are combined into a Human Well-being Index –
HWI and 51 indicators of land wealth, protected areas,
water quality, water supply, global atmosphere, air qua-
WN 25
lity, species diversity, energy use, and resource pressures
into an Ecosystem Well-being Index – EWI.
The indices are then combined into the Well-being Index
(WI) and the Wellbeing/Stress Index (WSI) that measure
the ratio of Human Well-being obtained in each country
to ecosystem stress. 67 geopolitical maps codified by co-
lors describe the performance of 180 countries on both
indices as well as their main indicators. In addition, all
data is presented in 160 pages of tables and the highly
accessible methodology is described in attachments so
that readers can make their own assessments.
NOTE
Wellbeing Assessment can be used at any level from
municipality to the world. It differs from other approa-
ches to assessing sustainability in its dual focus on hu-
man and ecosystem wellbeing and its use of the Baro-
meter of Sustainability to sum a comprehensive set of
indicators into the HWI, EWI, WI, and WSI.
The Wellbeing Assessment method a wide range of hu-
man and ecological aspects than more traditional mea-
sures such as the Gross Domestic Product, the United
Nations’ Human Development Index or the Environ-
mental Sustainability Index (ESI).
RESULTS
The report shows that all countries enjoying high standards
of living are placing undue pressure on the environment.
Thirty-seven countries are close to striking a good balance
between a healthy population and a healthy environment.
But to truly achieve this balance, even these 37 countries
must greatly improve their environmental efforts.
The best performing country is Sweden, which earned the
survey’s top ranking, even though the report considers
it an “ecosystem deficit” country: it obtains an advanced
standard of living through environmental damage.
Germany ranks 13th, Australia 18th, Japan 24th and the
United States 27th. In more than 140 nations, ecosystem
stress is higher than human well-being – evidence that
most people’s efforts to improve their lot are inefficient
and overexploit the environment.
“The report suggests that a high standard of living is possi-
ble without ruining the environment by changing the way
that development is pursued,” says Achim Steiner, Director
General of IUCN – The World Conservation Union--.
Referências
www.iucn.org/en/news/archive/2001_2005/press/wonback.doc
85
 3
Índice de Iniciativas

1. Redefining Prosperity 87

2. CMPEPS Stiglitz, Sen, Fitoussi 88

3. France Libertés Fondation 90

Orbis (Sustainability Indicators Regional Base
4. 92
Observatory)
5. Bogota, How are We Doing 94
Movimento Nossa São Paulo (Our São Paulo
6. 96
Movement: another city)

7. Juruti Sustentável 100

8. Legal Lucas do Rio Verde Project 102

9. BAWB – Global Forum América Latina 104

10. Global Action 108

86

Redefining
Prosperity
The Sustainable
Development Commission
Country
UK
What it is
The economy is currently geared, above all, to economic
growth. However in recent years, two other objectives
have moved up the political and policy-making agenda:
sustainability and wellbeing.
Origin
The Sustainable Development Commission – SDC - is
the Government’s independent adviser on sustainable
development, reporting to the Prime Minister, the First
Ministers of Scotland and Wales and the First Minister
and Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland. Throu-
gh advocacy, advice and appraisal, we help put sustai-
nable development at the heart of Government policy.
Objective
SDC’s project on Redefining Prosperity aims to map out
the relationships between these three aims – growth, sus-
tainability, wellbeing – and ask what issues are raised. Do
we have to choose between these aims? Can we combi-
ne them? What sorts of policies or approaches would we
need to have?
These questions go to the heart of what sustainable develo-
pment is about. Does it mean sustainability plus economic
growth? Or is it about finding a compromise or balance
between some sustainability and some growth? Or does
development mean something different from growth?
Does it mean progress towards increasing wellbeing? And
is it possible at all to define and promote wellbeing?
WN 1
Redefining Prosperity
Content
The project is divided into four main parts:
1. Visions of prosperity looked at different views put
forward about what prosperity means. Economic gro-
wth, measured by increases in Gross Domestic Pro-
duct, which basically means total national income in
a year, looks attractive because it links closely with the
assumption that most individuals aspire to increase
their income. Researchers, on the other hand, have
identified “alternative visions of prosperity” , which
can be more compelling. Can government policy aims
be revised to better reflect individual wants and hopes?
2. Economy Lite looked at the idea of decoupling –
separating economic growth from the damaging envi-
ronmental impacts it normally has. Can that link be
broken, with cleaner, more efficient technologies? Is
there any evidence that decoupling is already taking
place in Europe and North America? Or is that an
illusion created by the fact that we are increasingly
importing manufactured goods from Asia and Latin
America, giving them the environmental burden of our
consumption? Does that mean decoupling for real is
impossible, or are there still ways of achieving it?
3. Confronting Structure was about taking the ar-
guments against continuing growth seriously and
thinking through the consequences. If the economy
no longer grows, or grows at a much slower rate, what
happens to – unemployment, tax revenue, the ability
to repay debt and pay interest, company profits and
economic competitiveness? Can we imagine any go-
vernment pursuing this line of thinking? Or will they
be forced to because of economic pressures creating
long-term recession?
4. Wellbeing Policy looked at the evidence about what
contributes to people’s wellbeing, and asked - what
follows? Should we wish for a set of economic policies
designed to promote wellbeing? If so, would it differ
greatly from economic policies intended to promote
growth? What would the key differences be? Would
there be a different approach to work and to the impor-
tance of the unpaid activities which keep community
and family life going? Would the planning system give
greater priority to local democracy and quality of life?
Results
Redefining Prosperity is planned to result in a
major report from the SDC.
Reference
http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/pages/redefining-prosperity.
html
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/indicators/factsheet.pdf
87
 2 CMPEPS

La Commission CONTENT
This symposium is organized around three themes:
sur la Mesure des Reconsidering the progress of society: Thinking over
the measures and dimensions of social well-being and
Performances progress, knowing, for instance, that ‘growth’ is not
necessarily a sign of increased well-being of peoples.

Économiques et du In this sense, there is a need to determine what mat-

ters to society and, therefore, ‘measure something
else’. That makes us wonder what the values behind
Progrès Social our measures are. The question of ‘what’ to measure is
closely linked to ‘why measure’. The reason we search
for other indicators derives from the desire to clarify
(CMPEPS) the ends that are unattainable, because the existing
indicators are based on values that only prioritize
commercial economics and monetary policy. It would
Collectif FAIR : Forúm pour be convenient to ask, for example, if our citizens do
not value environmental and social health, as much as
d’Autres Indicateurs de sustainable human development.

Richesse Developing a collective construction: Reconside-

ring that social progress cannot be restricted to ex-
pert commissions, no matter how indispensable the
Commission on the measurement expertise of various areas is. The citizens should be
of economic performances and given the opportunity to say what ends are to be taken
into account, and the opportunity to participate in
social progress discussions about the way to take these ends into ac-
count. Participation of the civil society, political reso-
FAIR Collective: Forum on Other lutions and mobilization of surveys are necessary to
Wealth Indicators determine and select the ends to be achieved, and to
ponder on the corresponding assessment criteria and
procedures. It is time to reflect on the procedures and
methods to develop this collective construction.
Organizing the local indicators: Reflecting on the
country territories, communities and groups within the po-
pulation, whose participation is relevant to reconsi-
France
der the progress of society and develop a collective
construction. Learning from the existing experiences,
WHAT IT IS adopting practices derived from current initiatives.
A commission that offers a new vision of wealth and Sharing experiences in building indicators. It is, the-
sustainable human development. refore, a core theme because the local levels (com-
munities, municipalities, departments, countries,
ORIGIN regions…) emerge as places that are home to many
collective experiences of developing social indicators
Created by the President of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, in that should be shared.
January 2008:
STEP BY STEP
• to clarify the GDP’s limitations as a tool to measure
economic results and social progress; The Commission is organized around three work
• to identify the necessary supplementary information to groups:
identify more appropriate indicators; • Conventional questions to measure gross domestic product
• to determine the most suitable way to present this • Sustainability and Environment
information, as well as to assess the feasibility of alternative
measuring tools. • Quality of life

88

WG ONE. OUTLINE OF THE WORKS
ON GDP-RELATED ISSUES
1. From GDP to real income available, both in the economy
as a whole and on the household level, taking into
account depreciation, decreased resources, environmental
degradation, international income transfer, adjusted price
indexes, reflecting changes in quality and other aspects of
our changing society.
2. Real income available per consumer unit for the different
income classes. The median income as opposed to average
income.
3. The measures of volume and value based on results
obtained in the domains of health, education and other
non-commercial services, including those provided by the
government.
4. Gain/loss of capital/income.
5. Unpaid household labor and income, including inequality
measures.
6. Unpaid household labor and leisure.
7. Education as investment for human capital, including
depreciation and investment.
8. Assessment of safety, especially considering
accountability of the public sector.
9. Addressing defense expenditures, including safety-related
public and private expenses.
WG TWO. OUTLINE OF THE WORK ON SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT
1. Examining the way relevant environmental variables (such
as air and water quality) contribute to actual well-being
both directly and indirectly (through production and health
costs).
2. Investigating the impact of market failures on classical
sustainability monetary measures.
3. Exploring the use of other measurement methods in order
to value environmental changes.
4. Incorporating adjustments for resource depletion and
environmental degradation in the various ‘green’ income
measures (green GDP, green NNI, etc.).
5. Incorporating more comprehensive wealth change
measures, and developing specific measurement methods
when using a general measure covering all aspects is
impossible.
6. Adequately incorporating uncertainty measurement.
WG THREE. OUTLINE OF THE WORK ON QUALITY OF LIFE
Quality of life components
1. Hedonistic experiences (positive and negative feelings).
2. Value judgments (about life as a whole and its main
components).
3. Capacity (health, abilities, etc.).
Conditioning factors of quality of life
WN 2
CMPEPS
4. Personal activities (such as leisure, commuting, working
hours).
5. Personal safety (such as victimization, fear of criminality,
conflicts, wars).
6. Social environment (such as social links, trust,
guaranteed assistance, if necessary).
7. Institutional environment (such as freedoms,
participation in politics, judiciary system).
8. Natural environment (such as noise exposure, pollution,
access to public spaces).
Cross-cutting themes
9. Average quality of life inequalities.
10.Assessment of different methods to summarize
information on all life quality areas.
This commission drafted nine challenges to be faced to
revise the GDP:
1. Migrating from GDP to net real income available for
the whole economy and for the households, taking into
account depreciations, resource depletion, environmental
degradation, transfers in and out of the economy, as well as
appropriate price indexes;
2. Calculating the real income available per consumer
unit (adjusted household) for different income groups and
comparing averages to medians;
3. For health, education and other non-commercial services,
including those guaranteed by the government, obtaining
volume and price measures based on outputs;
4. Comparing incomes to capital gains and losses;
5. Considering unpaid household labor, including
inequalities;
6. Comparing unpaid household labor and leisure;
7. Considering education as investment to build human
capital, as well as its depreciation;
8. Assessing safety, especially when guaranteed by the
public sector;
9. Considering all defense expenditures, including private
expenses with safety.
REFERENCE
www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr
www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/documents/Issues_paper_VF.pdf
www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/fr/index.htm
www.idies.org/public/fichiers%20joints/Note_commission_
Stiglitz.pdf
www.idies.org
89
 3 France Libertés
France Libertés – FDM
‘Florestania’ is an attempt to draw attention to the fact that mankind is not the
center, but an integral part of Nature that depends on it. ‘Florestania’ seeks a new
social and natural pact, whereby mankind will come to an arrangement with
nature.” Aldem Bourscheit Cezarino
www.florestania.org/florestania/ToinhoFlorestania.htm.
WHAT IT IS
It is an international cooperation program established
between the Brazilian Economic and Social Develo-
pment Council and the France Libertes Foundation
aimed at developing new wealth indicators for the
State of Acre (Brazil) from a qualitative reflection
on our way of factoring in wealth and economic gro-
wth: highlighting both social progress and preserving
or protecting the environment, including the Ama-
zon Forest. The indicator’s objective is to reflect the
population’s well-being and include this well-being in
a sustainability logic. Likewise, an indicator based on
the concept of sustainable well-being of the Amazo-
nian population is consistent with the questions and
purposes of the Acre Municipalities Sustainability In-
dicator (ISMAC), a tool developed by the Acre Go-
vernment during the second phase of regional Ecolo-
gical-Economic Zoning (ZEE).
ORIGIN
EIn 1998, the French Minister of Sustainable Develop-
ment, Guy Hascoet, accepted Patrick Viveret’s proposal
to make an exploratory work regarding wealth indicators.
In its official mission, Viveret worked for three years on a
report entitled ‘Reconsidering Wealth’. Given the utmost
importance and relevance of the report produced, the
‘Wealth’ Collective was created in 2001 in France to carry
on the work outside the official mission. It is formed by
individuals and associations operating in the areas of art,
culture, ecology, health, popular education, humanitarian
action and solidary economics. It aims to mobilize citi-
zens from different perspectives to give their proactive
contribution to define wealth, in parallel with institutio-
nal logics and actions.
Together with this Collective, France Libertés engaged
in a dialogue with the Brazilian government to propose
90
an international cooperation agreement aimed at crea-
ting, developing and valuing these new wealth indica-
tors. A cooperation agreement was signed in Septem-
ber 2005.
OBJECTIVE
Ultimately, the project will benefit international insti-
tutions that work on indicators, as well as associations
that work in the solidary and social economy area.
This project aims to produce and develop new weal-
th indicators for Brazil; value and highlight human
wealth and ecological wealth frequently neglected by
public policy; strengthen the network around the con-
cept of ‘new types of wealth’ in France and abroad.
The proposal of new indicators seeks to create a sta-
tistical basis to measure the results of environmental
and social policy and economic development policy
for the populations of defined states. Education and
family values, popular culture, respect for nature and
sustainable use of resources, poverty and inequalities
reduction are some of the many critical aspects of ‘de-
velopment’ that are not acknowledged by our mains-
tream indicators, which leads us to a diagnosis that
can be, sometimes, very inaccurate about poverty and
development in these regions that are rich in natural
resources and folklore.
CONTENT
The indicator could respond to three needs that are cer-
tainly distinct, but indubitably complementary:
1)An indicator that tracks, for each Amazon region, the
changes along time;
2) An indicator that allows tracking the evolution of
sustainable well-being for the many municipalities of the
region studied. This is the approach already adopted by the
ISMAC;
 WN 3
France Libertés

3) An indicator that allows comparison between the
different regions (states, in this case) of Brazil based on the
triple vision of its economic dynamics and its social and
environmental health.
Considering the purposes of indicators, the final pro-
duct could be proposed as:
- Sustainable Well-Being Index of the Amazonian Population
- Amazon Sustainable Human Development Index
- Amazon Development Quality Index
EQUITABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
1. Average standard of living
2. Poverty
3. Employment and unemployment
4. Sustainable forest economy
5. Economic inequality of resources
6. Trade balance of some basic products
tiveness of sustainable development in the Amazon lies
in the interconnected nature of the environmental and
social spheres. The social conflicts – sometimes violent
ones – many times originate in economic issues, which
are related to the land, ownership rights and forms of
exploitation.
The assassination of Chico Mendes in Xapuri in De-
cember 1988 can illustrate the increased level of a so-
cial conflict that inextricably links the economic side
(exploitation of rubber by communities of rubber ta-
ppers) to the environmental factor (that is part of this
extractivist operation). The degradation of nature in the
Amazon has very direct and visible social effects: rapid
urbanization and poverty are frequently associated with
deforestation, pollution and intensive farming. Sustai-
nable development in the Amazon is not an ideological
or remote issue (neither in space nor in time).

HUMAN AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT REFERENCe

1. Education http://www.collectif-richesses.org/
2. Health
3. Access to basic services
4. Inequalities between genders
5. Quality of political and administrative institutions of the
civil society
6.Public safety and justice

ENVIRONMENTAL DIMENSION
1. Sustainable development of forests (not including
diversity)
2. Sustainable development of agricultural resources
3. Sustainable development of water resources
4. Biodiversity conservation
5. Waste and recycling
6. Carbon dioxide emissions
7. Soil quality and desertification

NOTE
The Acre State Government uses the formula ‘forest go-
vernment’ to stress that it takes the responsibility for en-
suring an ecological system to which man belongs. The
wealth of the state is the wealth of this system.
The Acre State Government, in parallel with similar ini-
tiatives in the State of Amapá, has long integrated the
vocabulary and ideas of sustainable development in its
various actions. This form of development has been
considered a pragmatic and attractive solution for social
and environmental problems that are common in the
Amazon. The main reason that can explain the attrac-

91
 4 Orbis

Orbis ORIGIN
In October 2003 the ICONS – International Conference
on Sustainable Development and Quality of Life Indica-
Sustainability Indicators tors was held in Curitiba gathering specialists from all
over the world to discuss alternative indicators to measu-
Regional Base Observatory re prosperity and quality of life on the planet. This led to
the creation of ORBIS in 2004, also guided by the defini-
tions of the 1992 Rio Declaration / Agenda 21; Habitat II
SESI PR – Paraná Industry Conference / 1996; Kyoto Protocol / 1997; Global Com-
Social Service pact / 1999, and Millennium Summit / 2000.
It is certified by the UN Global Urban Observatory
IPD – Paraná (GUO), which leads a global network of urban observa-
Development Institute tories, implemented by the UN-Habitat Programme – for
Human Settlement, aimed at helping implement the Ha-
bitat Agenda and the Millennium Development Goals,
generating national and local information.
It is supported by the FIEP System (Federation of Indus-
tries of the State of Paraná), Paraná Industry Social Servi-
ce (SESI PR), and the Development Promotion Institute
(IPD), among other organizations.

CONTENT
The indicators organized by Orbis are guided by the
Habitat Agenda and the eight Millennium Develop-
ment Goals as defined in the 2000 UN General Assem-
bly in New York, with 191 signatory countries.
Orbis provides information through the website and
printed publications to keep the various sectors of so-
ciety informed about the status of the indicators in the
country
State. It uses the following main tools:
Brazil
MODELO – Local Development Monitoring System

WHAT IT IS Online monitoring system aimed at helping organiza-

It is an organization that uses indicators to monitor,
review and disseminate information related to sustai-
nability and quality of life in the State of Paraná.
OBJECTIVE
Contributing to sustainable development in
partnership with public and private social actors by:
tions and people that work with social, economic and
environmental development projects to analyze and mo-
nitor local development. It provides access to and helps
create maps, charts and tables with social, demographic
and economic indicators that cover the whole State of Pa-
raná, separated by mesoregions and municipalities. The
information is divided into four major groups: governan-
ce, environmental sustainability, economic sustainability,
and social sustainability.

• Organizing and monitoring sustainability indicator All the update is made by Orbis and the data and indica-
systems; tors are collected from official sources.

• Developing studies, analyses and knowledge; Dynamic Report on Local Environmental, Economic and
Social Information
• Supporting reflection and decision-making processes
involving the future of Paraná. System that allows access to environmental, economic

92
 WN
Orbis 4

and social information about the municipalities of the
State of Paraná, with available data broken down by
municipality, state and country whenever possible.
Corporate Social Responsibility Mapping
Mapping of corporate social responsibility projects,
enabling the comparison of information between space
distribution of projects, focus area, regional needs, and
deprived areas. It allows for better definition of the focus
and area of work, publicity about the organizations; ne-
twork articulation able to mobilize government and civil
society in partnerships to better distribute programs in
the State.
Sources and Access Controls
Orbis was invited to present its urban observatory im-
plementation experience in several national and interna-
tional events in Germany, Ecuador, Rio de Janeiro (State
of Rio de Janeiro) (2005); Colombia, Canada and Mexico;
Guarujá (State of São Paulo) (2006); Portugal; Anchieta
and Vila Velha (State of Espírito Santo); Lençóis Paulista,
Santo André and São Paulo (State of São Paulo), besides
many cities in Paraná (2007); Belo Horizonte, Brasília,
Maceió, Porto Alegre (State of Rio Grande do Sul) (2008).
REFERENCE
www.orbis.org.br

Records of institutions that provide information con-

taining periodical researches done, indicators used ba-
sed on these sources, collection dates, expected update,
types and terms of dissemination, what enables the in-
formation update, allowing for higher efficiency in the
description of metadata.
Courses and Consultancy in Information Management;
Analysis and Interpretation of Indicators; Social Six
Sigma for Social Project Management; Social Surveys
and Field Surveys; Perception of the Impact of Business
Social Actions.

RESULTS
In 2004, the survey was used to make the report “Indi-
cadores do Milênio na Região Metropolitana de Curi-
tiba“ (Millennium Indicators in the Metropolitan Area
of Curitiba). In 2005, social and economic indicators
were brought up at state level to support the Fórum
Futuro 10, a strategic reflection process on the futu-
re development of the State in the next 10 years. In
2006, it launched the first edition of the “Indicadores
do Milênio para o Estado do Paraná “(Millennium In-
dicators for the State of Paraná), linked to the Nós Po-
demos Paraná (We Can Paraná) Movement. In 2007,
the second edition was launched, together with folders
of the mesoregions and the cities that comprise each
one of them; the data was made available to the parti-
cipants of the Movement’s meetings, and stood out as
an important regional development promotion tool. In
2008, it started a decentralization policy by implemen-
ting the Campos Gerais Regional Observatory and, in
partnership with the UNDP and the UNICEF, it struc-
tured the ODM Brazil Portal, containing the Millen-
nium Indicators of the 5,564 Brazilian municipalities,
to be launched in 2009.

93
 5 Bogota, How are We Doing
“Bogotá
Cómo Vamos”
Bogota,
How are We Doing
COUNTRY
Ecuador
WHAT IT IS
“Bogotá Cómo Vamos ” – BCV is a citizenship exer-
cise that periodically and systematically monitors the
quality of life evolution, focusing on the accomplish-
ment of the District Administration Development
Plan.
The project is the result of an interinstitutional allian-
ce between Casa Editorial El Tiempo, the Corona
Foundation and the Bogota Chamber of Commerce.
The monitoring measures improved access to goods
and services of better quality and takes into account
the public perception.
ORIGIN
This initiative took off during the 1997 electoral campaign
as a result of the lack of accountability that would allow
checking the fulfillment of campaign promises of the
mayor-elect and its impact on the city’s quality of life. The
1991 Constitution provided that citizens should exercise
social control over the management of collective issues by
monitoring the accountability of their local administration.
OBJECTIVE
The objectives of Bogotá Como Vamos are to create
positive impact on the quality of life as it builds kno-
wledge of the city. It consists of a forum for analysis
94
and debate aimed at having an effect on the Public Ad-
ministration, the general public and the expert groups
working in favor of the city.
In this sense, it fosters an effective and transparent go-
vernment because it requires accountability from the
District Administration, encouraging it to generate in-
formation needed for this accountability, and then have
this information assessed by experts and citizens. Li-
kewise, it fosters a better informed, participatory and
responsible citizen for it discloses assessment reports
for the general public, and has the public say its percep-
tion of quality and access to public services, communi-
cating the results of this survey to the citizens.
Finally, it fosters strategic alliances for the development
of policy to improve quality of life, creating forums
for debate and knowledge in order to potentialize the
efforts and resources of the different actors that assess
and carry out the city monitoring. By promoting a per-
manent discussion forum for discussion on Bogota, it
allows for the complementation of existing knowledge
and encourages institutional learning.
CONTENT
• Poverty and Equality
• Urban Mobility
• Public Finance
• Public Forum
• Education
• Environment
• Health
• Responsibility
• Public Services
STEP BY STEP
Assessing and Disseminating the Strategies of
Bogotá Como Vamos
BCV has two core strategies to enable the achievement
of its objectives: the first is the assessment strategy who-
se core pillar is the concept of quality of life and the se-
cond is the dissemination strategy, which seeks to com-
municate to the public the results of all the analysis and
assessment exercise.
The assessment and monitoring exercise carried out by
BCV has quality of life as its core concept, described
as “the set of citizens’ rights, which are the State’s du-
ties, provided for in the 1991 Constitution, such as the
access to quality services in the following areas: educa-
tion, health, utilities, housing, environment.” Similarly,
it is understood that quality of life is a dynamic concept.
Consequently, it can change over time and according to
the conditions of the city

Bogota, How are We Doing
Assessment Strategy
In order to carry out the assessment, the project makes
use of technical indicators and perception of results, as
well as monitoring of the main issues and problems
(key projects of the Administration and problems of
the population).
The results of technical indicators are those that ac-
count for the impact of the management results and,
therefore, show the coverage and quality of basic goo-
ds and services.
That means the BCV does not assess, for instance, the
number of schools built, but the actual increase in ac-
cess to education; or else, in the case of traffic, instead
of the number of kilometers of roads built, the average
transport time.
Once provided by the Administration, this informa-
tion is validated by a panel of experts, by the percep-
tion indicators, and their corresponding coherence
along time, according to the Project’s records.
The perception indicators show the citizen’s opinion
about the assessment areas. These indicators are re-
lated to the access to quality classification of basic
goods and services as well as to the successes and
shortcomings of the public and private schools’ ac-
countability. Similarly, the citizen can benefit from the
set of public organizations and their main programs in
terms of image, trust and management.
In this sense, the perception indicators can show the
opinion of the city dwellers about public goods and ser-
vices and go beyond the technical indicators of result.
The public perception has been recorded since the
first BCV Annual Perception survey was conducted in
1998. This survey covers the Bogota urban area, divi-
ded into zones, age and gender groups. The informa-
tion on the public perception since 1998 has enabled
the project to make trend analyses in classification
and provision of basic goods.
Communication Strategy
The communication strategy focuses on bringing perio-
dical quality information on the city, its advances, proble-
ms and proposed solutions. The purpose of publicizing
the information is to help qualifying the decisions of ci-
tizens and bring analysis tools to the experts, opinion-
makers and the local Administration.
On the other hand, the BCV organizes roundtables and
WN 5
forums with the District Administration to carry out the
monitoring for the development, implementation and
execution of the Bogota Development Plan.
RESULTS
The main accomplishments of the Project are related
to its impact on the District Administration, which can
count on better information that is more relevant, ti-
mely, regular and result-oriented. In addition, the Dis-
trict Administration has made its own accountability
processes complementary to the project. Likewise, the
District Government receives feedback not only from
the assessment reports, but also from the annual per-
ception survey, which are used in decision-making and
in its management self-assessment.
In this sense, the observations and proposals made by
the BCV have been increasingly taken into account by
the District Administration. The city has a set of indi-
cators that will support the existence of the project as
it continues. Likewise, there are 8 years (since 1998)
of records of the citizens’ perception, which show the
city’s change.
Currently there are replications of the Project in the ci-
ties of Cartagena, Cali, Medellin and Barranquilla, and
the operation of the BCV’s sister project, to assess the
institutional performance of the Bogota Congress, cal-
led ‘Conselho Como Vamos’ (‘Congress, How are We
Doing’).
Finally, the Project has received many awards: it was
given the Dubai International Award for Best Practices
to Improve the Living Environment in 2000 and 2002,
and was chosen to be presented in the World Bank’s
Second Regional Meeting on Social Accountability in
the Dominican Republic in 2003 and in the Universal
Forum of Cultures in Barcelona.
REFERENCE
info@bogotacomovamos.org
http://www.bogotacomovamos.org
95
 6 Our São Paulo Moviment
Our São Paulo
Movement: another
city
Sustainable São Paulo
Institutel
“The basis is the ethics of co-responsibility,
the means is mobilization and participation,
and the end is an equitable and sustainable
São Paulo.” Antonio Carlos Gomes da Costa
COUNTRY
Brazil
WHAT IT IS
Non-partisan, inter-religious participatory process that
works for a ‘sustainable’ city based on successful expe-
riences previously carried out in Bogota and Barcelona,
among others. It is supported by hundreds of commu-
nity leaders, civil society entities and organizations, as
well as citizens interested in participating in the pro-
cess of building a new São Paulo.
ORIGIN
The Movimento Nossa São Paulo (Our São Paulo Mo-
vement) was born from the perception that the credi-
bility of political activity, public institutions and demo-
96
cracy in Brazil has been shaken, and that it is necessary
to foster initiatives that can bring back to the society
values such as sustainable development, ethics and par-
ticipatory democracy.
The movement has been legally organized as Institu-
to São Paulo Sustentável-ISPS (Sustainable São Paulo
Institute), a non-profit institution qualified as a public
interest civil society organization. The Institute’s pur-
poses are as follows:
- Coordinating the administrative actions of data and
information collection to support civic and social
mobilization initiatives;
- Supporting movements, initiatives, projects and programs
that foster sustainable, economic, social and environmental
urban development, especially those focused on the city of
São Paulo;
- Fostering ethics, peace, citizenship, human rights,
democracy and other universal values;
- Conducting studies and polls related to the above-
mentioned activities.
In order to achieve these purposes, the institute relies
on the financial support of private companies of va-
rious segments and areas, which contribute cash or
donate equipment.
OBJECTIVES
The Movement intends to build a political, social and
economic power able to commit the society and suc-
cessive governments to an agenda and a set of goals
so as to provide all the city’s inhabitants with better
quality of life. It aims to turn São Paulo into a safe, he-
althy, beautiful, solidary and truly democratic city. In
addition, the Movement seeks the participation of all
the society to gather ideas and propose actions that
can contribute to an equitable and sustainable develo-
pment of the city in key areas like Education, Environ-
ment, Safety, Leisure and Culture, Labor, Transport,
Housing, Health and Services.
CONTENT
Guidelines
I – INDICATORS AND GOALS PROGRAM – HOW WE ARE
AND WHERE WE CAN GET: THE OTHER SÃO PAULO WE
DESIRE
Selecting and organizing the main indicators of quality
of life in the city (for each administrative unit), so that
they can be used as a basis for political parties, succes-

Our São Paulo Moviment
sive governments and the civil society to commit to
programs and goals for an equitable and sustainable
São Paulo. Organizing a database of best urban sustai-
nability initiatives.
II – CITIZEN MONITORING – SÃO PAULO,
HOW ARE WE DOING
Continuously communicating and publishing on the
website São Paulo Como Vamos (São Paulo, How Are
We Doing), with periodical and regular updating, the
evolution of indicators of quality of life in each city ad-
ministrative unit, so they can be systematically moni-
tored by all the society. Systematically monitoring the
works of the City Council. Conducting annual public
opinion polls to learn and publicize the population’s
perception of the different municipal actions in all the
city’s administrative units.
III – CITIZEN CULTURE
Carrying out actions and campaigns aimed at changing
the population’s behavior, adding value to the public envi-
ronment, improving self-esteem and the feeling of belon-
ging to a city that is everyone’s asset and should be kept
by everyone (communication programs; proposals for
S.P.; educational campaigns and participatory actions).
IV – PARTNERSHIPS
Promoting partnerships between companies, non-
governmental organizations, city administrative units
and departments to implement the Citizen Culture ac-
tions and campaigns and also to support more urgent
social programs (enhancing the day-care centers and
other public services that will be able to receive new
support to eliminate their deficits). Partnering with the
media to better publicize monitoring of the indicators
and goals and to contribute to the educational cam-
paigns and participatory actions.
V – ENHANCING THE NETWORKS / SOCIAL
MOBILIZATION
Continuously fostering the incorporation of new lea-
ders, companies and social organizations into the mo-
vement. Establishing forums in all the areas covered
by the city administrative units. Keeping and updating
the ‘Our São Paulo’ portal and the ‘São Paulo, How Are
We Doing’ website as the Movement’s media.
VI – EXEMPLARITY
Supporting the development of new movements in
WN
6
other cities and regions of Brazil; Holding in São Paulo
the Sustainable Cities Conference.
VII - INFRASTRUCTURE
Forums, Work Groups, Social Networks; Support
Group: to Forums, WGs and Networks, continuous
maintenance and updating of the ‘Our São Paulo’ por-
tal and the ‘São Paulo, How Are We Doing’ website.
STEP BY STEP
The movement’s performance is around 4 major theme
areas:
Indicators and goals program:
I. Selecting and systematizing the main indicators of
quality of life in the areas covered by the city adminis-
trative units, so that they can be used as a basis for the
civil society, political parties and successive govern-
ments to commit to programs and goals for São Paulo.
II. Organizing a database of best urban sustainability
initiatives.
Example: indicators
A set of 130 social, environmental, economic, political
and cultural indicators of the city of São Paulo and each
one of its 31 administrative units, which will be studied,
assessed and monitored in the next years. The data was
organized by theme areas, with definitions and sources.
7. Violence
1. Health
8. Environment
2. Education
9. Culture
3. Labor and income
10 Budget
4. Social work
11. Sports
5. Housing
12. Monitoring
6. Transport and
urban mobility
The process of developing and choosing the indicators
involved hundreds of people, tens of civil society or-
ganizations, many companies and several technicians
and experts gathered in 14 Work Groups (WGs) for
about four months to provide the city with this path.
The relevant figures, charts, backgrounds and other
data are available at Observatório Cidadão Nossa
São Paulo (Our São Paulo Citizen Observatory), who-
se website is www.nossasaopaulo.org.br.
97
 6 Our São Paulo Moviment
The main objective of the Citizen Observatory (www.
nossasaopaulo.org.br/observatorio) is to monitor the
municipal public administration and provide the so-
ciety with tools to influence public policy.
The key objective is to assess, year on year, the quality
of life in the city, the social policy and the municipal
public administration, among others, so as to provi-
de the civil and political societies with the necessary
resources to exert a decisive influence on the public
policy goals to make their priority become the cons-
truction of an equitable and sustainable city.
The monitoring of the City Budget was also included
in the indicators and is an area where the municipal
administration needs to improve its data, its transpa-
rency and its distribution among administrative units.
Another area that will be monitored through a speci-
fic methodology is the city’s legislative power. The
City Council has strong power over the municipal ad-
ministration, its budget priorities and, consequently,
over the quality of life in the city
Citizen monitoring:
I. Continuously communicating and publishing, with
periodical and regular updating, the evolution of indica-
tors of quality of life in each city administrative unit, so
they can be systematically monitored by all the society.
II. Systematically monitoring the works of the City
Council.
III. Mobilizing the population to monitor the City Budget.
IV. Conducting annual public opinion polls to learn and
publicize the population’s perception of the different
municipal actions in all the city’s administrative units.
Example: 1st perception poll “Viver em São Paulo” (Li-
ving in São Paulo) carried out in the City of São Paulo
in January 2008.
Main issues highlighted:
1. Weather and image
2. Quality of life in the city
3. Public safety
4. Public health
5. Public education
6. Other services
7. Inclusion and citizenship
98
8. 2008 elections
9. Discrimination and prejudice
10. Cultural and leisure activities
11. Municipal administration and national political
panorama
12. Trust in institutions
Citizen education:
I. Changes in the population’s behavior
II. Adding value to public environment
III. Improving self-esteem and the feeling of belonging to a
city that is everyone’s asset and should be kept by everyone
Example: 2007 World Carfree Day
Citizen mobilization:
I. Fostering the incorporation of new leaders, compa-
nies and social organizations into the movement.
II. Establishing forums in all the areas covered by the
city administrative units.
III. Keeping the ‘Our São Paulo’ portal (www.nossasa-
opaulo.org.br) as an effective communication channel
between networks, press and the civil society as a whole.
IV. Creating exemplarity to other cities, states and re-
gions of Brazil.
Example: I Our São Paulo Forum – Proposals for an
Equitable and Sustainable City
- Process of mobilizing the society to make proposals for the
main social, economic, political, environmental and urban
challenges of São Paulo;
- Making them available to all the society, including the
public powers and the political parties that will participate
in the next local elections;
- Forming a Latin-American network of sustainable cities.
Note
In February 2008, amendment to the Organic Law of the
City no. 30 was passed, requiring that mayors publicize a
detailed government plan, according to the guidelines of
the electoral campaign, within 90 days after taking offi-
ce. The Goals Program will have to be separated by city
administrative units and districts. The amendment also
establishes the accountability of goals achievement to the
population every six months. This rule shall be effective
for the mayor whose tenure starts in January 2009.
 Our São Paulo Moviment 6

Signed by the 400+ organizations participating in the

Movement. The final approval is the result of intense
articulation of the Movement with the City Council lea-
ders in the last six months.

REFERENCE
www.nossasaopaulo.org.br

The ‘Como Vamos’ (How Are We Doing) Network, also

called ‘Rede Cidadã por Cidades Justas e Sustentáveis’
(Citizen Network for Equitable and Sustainable Cities),
integrates in Latin America the initiatives from Bar-
ranquilla, Bogota, Calí, Cartagena and Medellin (Co-
lombia), Buenos Aires (Argentina), Lima (Peru), Quito
(Ecuador) and Santiago (Chile).
In Brazil, the network started with the Our São Paulo
Movement. At federal level, the network ‘Rede Social
Brasileira por Cidades Justas e Sustentáveis’ (Brazilian
Social Network for Equitable and Sustainable Cities)
was created including the following cities: Belém (PA),
Belo Horizonte (MG), Brasília (DF), Curitiba (PR),
Florianópolis (SC), Goiânia (GO), Holambra (SP), Ilha
Bela (SP), Ilhéus (BA), Januária (MG), Maringá (PR),
Niterói (RJ), Peruíbe (SP), Porto Alegre (RS), Recife
(PE), Salvador (BA), Ribeirão Bonito (SP), Rio de Ja-
neiro (RJ), Santos (SP), São Luis (MA), São Paulo (SP),
Teresópolis (RJ) and Vitória (ES).

99
 7 Juruti Sustentável
Juruti
Sustentável
Funbio – Fundo Brasileiro para a
Biodiversidade
(Brazilian Biodiversity Fund)
FGV – Fundação Getulio Vargas
COUNTRY
Brazil
WHAT IT IS
Sustainable local development model for Juruti and
surrounding area due to changes brought about by the
arrival of a company in the area.
ORIGIN
In December 2005, ALCOA contacted the Getúlio Var-
gas Foundation (FGV), which partnered with the Bra-
zilian Biodiversity Fund to create a sustainable local de-
velopment model for Juruti and surrounding area due
to changes brought about by the arrival of this com-
pany in the area.
Juruti has one of the largest deposits of high quality
bauxite in the world. For the population of the town
and surrounding area, the arrival of ALCOA brings
a lot of expectations, uncertainties and memories of
past mining experiences in the Amazon. Many fore-
see opportunities for growth and economic prosperity.
Others are concerned with the risk of impacts on the
quality of life and the environment.
100
OBJECTIVE
The creation of development indicators for Juruti and
surrounding area is fundamentally based on broad and
democratic participation of all stakeholders through
preparatory visits, workshops using participatory tech-
niques, design of appropriate information material, res-
pecting the time required for adjustment and engage-
ment of the local and regional population, and valuing
the development process as well as the results reached.
In parallel with the participatory and informed develo-
pment, the process includes a comprehensive research
on the knowledge and experiences in Brazil and abro-
ad around the development and sustainability theme,
including a detailed survey of the local and regional
policies and initiatives, so as to contextualize the pro-
ject in the local reality, make a preliminary diagnosis of
the area, as well as a technical-academic monitoring of
the indicators developed aimed at devising metrics and
protocols to support the future tool.
The activities of the indicators development process
consist of: reference research, diagnosis of the baseline,
preparatory visits, workshops in Juruti, Santarém and
Belém for preliminary indicators development, face-to-
face public consultation in Juruti and surrounding area
and on the Internet, development of metrics, protocols
and traceability of indicators proposed, consolidation
of results and first diagnosis in Juruti and surrounding
area.
CONTENT
In 2006, a report entitled Juruti Sustentável: Diagnóstico
e Recomendações (Sustainable Juruti: Diagnosis and Re-
commendations) was issued and it showed a model for
the implementation of a sustainable local development
agenda. The model is structured around three pillars:
1. Creation of a local development forum with effective
participation of all stakeholders to discuss a common
public interest future, prioritize actions and set a long-
term agenda.
2. Creation of sustainable development indicators to
monitor the development of Juruti and surrounding
area and enhance the public decision-making processes.
• Reference research and draft proposal of development
indicators created from survey and detailed review of global
experiences, with the purpose of supporting participatory
construction. Carried out in Nov 2007.
• Diagnosis of social, economic and environmental baseline
of the municipality of Juruti, developed from supporting
data, and characterized as a first baseline for monitoring
local development. Carried out in Nov 2007.
 WN
Juruti Sustentável 7

• Workshops to create development indicators for Juruti

and surrounding area together with the local population and
regional actors (Carried out in Jan 2008 in Juruti, Feb 2008
in Santarém, and Apr 2008 in Belém).
• Monitoring Group, local representatives from the Juruti
town hall, Juruti’s social organizations, and ALCOA to
monitor and actively participate in the process of building
the indicators. Carried out in Jan 2008, with monthly
meetings since then.
• Public Consultation of the indicators created in the
workshops on the Internet and through mini-workshops in
rural communities – from the wetlands and the plateau – of
the municipality of Juruti. Mini-workshops carried out on Jul
7 – 23, 2008 / Public Consultation available on the Internet
on Aug 4 – Sep 20, 2008.
• Indicators’ Verification and Traceability Metrics and
Protocols
• Consolidation of Results: Final version of the development
indicators for Juruti and surrounding area with respective
metrics and protocols.
• First Development Diagnosis of Juruti and Surrounding
Area, made from primary and secondary data.

3. Creation of a local and regional development fund to

raise funds and invest in actions based on monitoring
results of the development of Juruti and surrounding
area and priority goals identified in the forum.
Document for Public Consultation

1. DIMENSION: ENVIRONMENT
Theme: Conservation and Use of Biodiversity
Theme: Mineral Resources
Theme: Land Use
Theme: Soil Occupancy
Theme: Environmental Quality

2. DIMENSION: HUMAN BEING AND SOCIETY

Theme: Fundamental Conditions
Theme: Citizenship and Democracy
Theme: Population

3. DIMENSION: ECONOMY AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Theme: Economy
Theme: Basic Sanitation
Theme: Infrastructure.

REFERENCE
http://www.fgv.br/ces/juruti/indicadores/consulta/

101
 8 Legal Lucas
Legal Lucas do
Rio Verde Project
TNC – The Nature
Conservancy
COUNTRY
Brazil
WHAT IT IS
The project (Dec 2006) is a unique partnership in Brazil
to make this municipality, located 350 km away from
Cuiabá (State of Mato Grosso), the first one to have
all its rural properties legalized pursuant to the Forest
Code, turning Lucas do Rio Verde into one of the few
municipalities in the country without social and envi-
ronmental liabilities in the agricultural sector, without
labor problems, and using agrochemicals appropriately
and safely. Accounting for 1% of the Brazilian soybeans
production, Lucas do Rio Verde, in Mato Grosso, grows
10% a year.
ORIGIN
It is an initiative of the Lucas do Rio Verde Town Hall
and the TNC – The Nature Conservancy (*), in par-
tnership with the State Department of Environment
(SEMA), Rio Verde Foundation, Lucas do Rio Verde
Rural Union, State Public Prosecutor’s Office, Syngen-
ta, Sadia Sustainability Institute, Sadia and Fiagril.
OBJECTIVE
The project’s main objective is reduce the environ-
mental, sanitation and labor liabilities to zero in the
( *) Founded in 1951, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is one of the largest and oldest environmental NGOs in the world. Working in more than 30 countries, its mission
is to preserve the plants, animals and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive. Present
in Brazil since 1988, it carries out over 20 large initiatives in the main Brazilian biomes (Amazon, Rainforest, Cerrado, Pantanal and Caatinga) aimed at making the
economic and social development compatible with the conservation of natural ecosystems. In the last few years, its actions contributed to the conservation of more than
20 million hectares all over the country, an area equivalent to the State of São Paulo.
102
agricultural activity and allow the products to be tra-
ced and to have free access to the most demanding
world markets. In other words, it aims to build in Lu-
cas do Rio Verde a new sustainability concept for the
country’s agribusiness.
CONTENT
The model to be implemented in this project can be
used as a guide to the local and regional development
processes for the future regional development of the
Amazon with the challenge of setting a common agen-
da for the production sector, research organizations,
governments at different levels, civil society and en-
vironmental organizations, so as to test development
models that ensure harmony between production and
environmental conservation.
STEP BY STEP
Broken down into several phases, the project aims at
reducing the environmental, sanitation and labor lia-
bilities to zero in the agricultural activity and allow
the products to be traced and to have free access to
the most demanding world markets.
After engaging 100% of the landowners, the first pha-
se could be completed with a comprehensive and
georeferenced mapping of the conditions of each
property, which enables the indication of necessary
measures to rectify existing irregularities.
The next phase, which includes a recovery plan for APPs
(Permanent Preservation Areas), will have as its main
support an executive order signed by mayor Marino
Franz defining the Permanent Preservation Areas as
priority ones for governmental action, and establishing
the isolation and prohibition of agricultural activity wi-
thin its boundaries starting from the next crop for pro-
tection and restoration of the natural vegetation.
Other support points will be the partnership agree-
ment signed between the City Hall, the Landowners
Union, the Public Prosecutor’s Office and local agri-
cultural engineers for effective assistance and mo-
nitoring of APPs recovery and the development of a
capacity-building plan for environmental groups to
enable a total control over the impacts of the produc-
tion activity.
 WN
Legal Lucas 8

The project also provides that environmental liabili-

ties can be offset by collective mechanisms, pursuant
to laws in force, including legal reservations in con-
dominium, thus maximizing the areas of connected
native ecosystems under protection. The integrated
efforts of companies, TNC, state and local govern-
ments are expected to build a legalization process
that should benefit both the environment and the
landowners.
Syngenta is a world-leading agribusiness committed
to sustainable agriculture through innovative research
and technology.
The company is a leader in crop protection, and ranks
third in the high-value commercial seeds market. Sales
in 2007 were approximately US$ 9.2 billion. Syngenta
employs more than 21 thousand people in more than
90 countries.

RESULTS With products in the areas of pesticides, seeds and urban

pest control, Syngenta helps producers all over the world
Goals achieved in 2007: Recording of the 670 rural to raise their productivity and address the growing de-
properties and notification of landowners that they mand for food and fuel.
must replant deforested areas near water springs.
Syngenta product solutions contribute to the develop-
Next goals: Reforesting 2,000 hectares of permanent ment of agribusiness, always aiming at sustainability and
preservation areas and seeking a solution for the fo- the population’s quality of life.
rest reservation areas to be protected.
Following this guideline, the company offers information,
Lucas do Rio Verde is the evidence that economic technology and new opportunities for thousands of far-
growth and environmental respect are not irreconci- mers all over the country through its social and environ-
lable. The Lucas project is encouraging other towns mental projects. That is how Syngenta helps to cultivate
to follow the same path. With the help of Syngen- respect for the environment and for people everyday.
ta, the town of Catalão, in Goiás, is considering the
adoption of this model. In the North of Mato Grosso,
13 municipalities are discussing the details to close
an ambitious environmental pact to create financial
incentives for the preservation of forests – an unpre-
cedented project in the whole world.
The project is a municipal highlight in the first edi-
tion of the “Prêmio Brasil de Meio Ambiente” (Brazil
Environmental Award), organized by Jornal do Brasil
and Revista JB Ecológico (JB Ecology Magazine) in
partnership with Gazeta Mercantil and Forbes Brazil
Magazine.

REFERENCE
www.tnc.org/brasil

103
 9 BAWB
BAWB –
Global Forum
América Latina
/Call for Action
Fiepr – Federation of Industries
of the State of Paraná
“This moment requires a global, holistic vision. For this
vision to be implemented, it is certainly necessary more
specific actions with common goals and principles.” Ro-
drigo da Rocha Loures, president of the Fiepr System.
WHAT IT IS
The BAWB / Global Forum América Latina / Call For
Action (GFAL) is a movement that aims to tap into the
creativity of its participants to foster cooperation among
institutions, organizations and the society towards a sus-
tainable world. It is more specifically a call for action in-
tended to identify and implement innovative actions in
the field of education by using the Appreciative Inquiry
methodology1.
ORIGIN
In 2006, the Case Western Reserve University, in part-
nership with the Academy of Management, which ga-
thers approximately 19,000 management teachers from
90 different countries and around 4,000 companies
worldwide joined by the United Nations Global Com-
pact, set up the Global Forum on Business as an Agent
of World Benefit.
The B.A.W.B – Business as an Agent of World Benefit, a
movement in which the Global Forum is inserted, has been
since then the largest summit able to call and attract more
than 1,000 executives from corporations as big as Alcoa,
Toyota and Unilever, among others; renowned business
professors, managers in charge of public policy making,
social leaders and young students from all over the world.
104
The main objective of the BAWB - Global Forum
summit was to align theory and practice so that the-
se domains would come up with the understanding
that sustainability could become the greatest business
opportunity of the 21st Century. The BAWB-Global
Forum América Latina, held in Brazil, offers this pers-
pective.
In 2008, in Curitiba – Brazil, the UNINDUS – FIEP/PR
System’s Industrial Companies University, in partner-
ship with the Center for Sustainability Studies – Ge-
túlio Vargas Foundation (EAESP/ FGV) and the Case
Western Reserve University (USA), in response to a
recommendation of the GF-BAWB Call for Action in
Cleveland, organized the BAWB-Global Forum Amé-
rica Latina.
CONTENT
Participants were invited to take part in initiatives
addressing their areas of interest, create their own ini-
tiatives and contribute to a sustainability actions data-
base.
“Willingness is not enough. Capability is necessary, and
that translates into a well-designed project, committed
people that can give their vital contribution to developing
this collective thinking project and to disseminating it for
further development”. Rodrigo da Rocha Loures.
OBJECTIVES
1. Raising awareness about the existing opportunities for
building multi-sectoral alliances aimed at education for
sustainable development;
2. Sharing strengths and celebrating innovations and
strategies for social, environmental and economic
sustainability;
3. Generating a conscious intention and a common vision
for the development of leaders and citizens dedicated to a
sustainable society of the future;
4. Developing initiatives that use the strengths of the
academia (universities and schools) and the corporate world
to help build a sustainable and prosperous society;
5. Acting cooperatively.
“The objective is to foster a shared vision of ways to pro-
vide students with values and tools that make them able
to act according to the requirements of sustainability. Fo-
cused on a transforming education, understood as a self-
driven and social education in which the subjects coope-
ratively take charge of learning, which necessarily means
innovation and creativity.” Rodrigo da Rocha Loures
Universities, colleges and business schools should
update their curricula to keep up with the challenges
of the national and global situation. The young people

that are currently in the university will be performing,
in the next decades, in a totally different economic, so-
cial and business reality. The curricula should address
the sustainability theme in a cross-cutting way, besides
incorporating new teaching technologies.
RESULTS
Participants of the BAWB-Global Forum América La-
tina discussed actions that would help strengthening
the relations between the corporate world and the aca-
demia, providing knowledge sharing and identifying
sustainability-centered business practices as a business
opportunity for the 21st Century, thus fostering the de-
velopment of proposals for innovation and change in
education, in forms of production, in social construc-
tion and in forms of consumption, as well as in forms of
political management.
Next, some of the countless initiatives that have been
dreamed of and planned, and are now in place. Learn
more at www.globalforum.com.br
• Creation of Sustainable Responsibility principles/
guidelines for the State of Paraná
• Review of the legislation
• Effective Shared Management between Civil Society and
Government
• Kaleidoscope – Rediscovering Values
• Recovering Moral and Civic Values (values, ethics,
citizenship, education, engaged participation of the civil
society)
What is an Appreciative Inquiry?
Appreciative Inquiry, developed in the United States by
David Cooperrider, can be defined as a positive approach
to change management and organizational development.
It is a cooperative search for the best in people, their
organizations and the relevant world around them. It
involves systematic discovery of what gives “life” to a
living system when it is most alive, most effective, and
most constructively capable in economic, ecological,
and human terms. Appreciative Inquiry involves, in a
central way, the art and practice of asking questions that
strengthen a system’s capacity to apprehend, anticipate,
and heighten positive potential. It centrally involves
the mobilization of inquiry through the crafting of
the “unconditional positive question” often involving
hundreds or sometimes thousands of people.
WN
BAWB 9
• Planning and Implementation Center for Sustainable
Strategic Projects in Distributed Network
• Pre-electoral forum for sustainability
• Creation of a cross-cutting and intersectoral capacity-
building and education center for sustainability
In Brazil, the Global Forum América Latina has been
held in the States of Paraná and São Paulo.
In April 2009, in João Pessoa, State of Paraíba, the Glo-
bal Forum/Call for Action Northeast will take place,
gathering Federations of Industries from the nine sta-
tes of the Northeast.
In May 2010, a Global Forum/Call for Action will take
place in Manaus, State of Amazonas, covering the
Northern Region.
The Global Forum Social Network was created and ex-
pects to gather representatives from all sectors to carry
on the discussions and put forward actions on sustai-
nability education.
REFERENCE
www.globalforum.com.br
Collaboration
Margarita Bosch (Fiepr)
Marilda Schiller de Moraes
(WBA – Willis Harman House)
Many organizations consider themselves as a problem
to be solved. People hold meetings to make a list of
problems and then they search for the causes to come
up with solutions. There is a big difference between
this method and Appreciative Inquiry. In AI, the
focus is not on the problem, but on building a desired
future based on existing powers. The organization is
no longer perceived as a problem to be solved, and
becomes the solution, more like a mystery to be
unraveled.
In short, Appreciative Inquiry allows building
knowledge in group from what is best in people, in
collective reflection, inspired by cooperation with a
shared objective.
105
 9 BAWB
STEP BY STEP OF AN APPRECIATIVE
INQUIRY SUMMIT
The whole system participates – a cross-section of as many
interested parties as is practical. That means more diversity
and less hierarchy than usual in a working meeting, and a
chance for each person to be heard and to learn other ways
of looking at the task at hand.
We start with an approach to change based on strengths.
Before jointly imagining the future possibilities, first we
reconnect to our main success factors, that is, things that
enable us to succeed when we are at our best.
People self-manage their work and use dialogue – not pro-
blem solving – as the main tool. That means helping each
other do the tasks and taking responsibility for our percep-
tions and actions.
Common ground and narrative rich interaction rather
than “conflict management” or negotiation as the frame
of reference. That means honoring our differences rather
than having to reconcile them, and searching for meanin-
gs, and direction in stories that honor and connect us to
our “history as positive possibility”.
Inspired action on behalf of the whole – Because the “who-
le system” is involved it is easier to make more rapid de-
cisions, and to make commitments to action in a public
way – in an open way that everyone can support and help
make happen. The movement to action is guided by inter-
nal inspiration, shared leadership, and voluntary initiative.
WORK FRONT CREATED AT GFAL IN SÃO PAULO
IN NOVEMBER 2008
REINVENTING THE ECONOMY: IMR - MULTIDIMENSIONAL
WEALTH INDEX: NEW INDICATORS, CURRENCIES AND
FLOWSS
Participants of the BAWB-Global Forum América La-
tina discussed actions that would help strengthening
the relations between the corporate world and the aca-
demia, providing knowledge sharing and identifying
sustainability-centered business practices as a business
opportunity for the 21st Century, thus fostering the de-
velopment of proposals for innovation and change in
education, in forms of production, in social construc-
tion and in forms of consumption, as well as in forms of
political management.
106
People work on what they share a passion about, what they
most care about and believe will make the difference.
Methodology
Process application has four key stages:
• Discovery: mobilizing a whole system inquiry into the
positive change core through stakeholder engagement
with the articulation of strengths and best practices. It is
systems or systemic inquiry in the positive core.
• Dream: creating a clear results-oriented vision in relation
to discovered potential. It visualizes the highest potentials
of the organization for positive influence and effect on the
world, challenging the status quo.
• Design: creating possibility propositions from the positive
core alive in all of its strategies, processes, systems, decisions
and collaborations of the organization. It is the design of the
organization’s social-technological architecture.
• Destiny: initiates a series of inspired actions in order to
implement the discovery, the dream, and the design. It is
the destiny stage in which positive images of the future are
sustained. It is a time for continuous learning, adjustment
and improvisation in the service of shared ideals. It is time
to develop the ‘appreciative eye’ of the organization in all
its systems, procedures and work methods.
This methodology is based on five principles:
• The Constructionist Principle
• The Principle of Simultaneity
• The Poetic Principle
• The Anticipatory Principle
• The Positive Principle
Out of the countless work fronts proposed, the ones
that received the most votes by the participants were
chosen for the creation of work groups to perform
them either individually or in group.
Below is the work presentation of Roundtable 36
comprising 17 members: the creation of a Multidi-
mensional Wealth Index – IMR.
The IMR is a set of indicators and new currencies that
allow for balance in managing the four dimensions of
Whole Sustainability: the economic, environmental,
social and cultural dimensions, measured by quanti-
tative and qualitative metrics. The new model in pla-
ce prioritizes human values and intangible resources
(knowledge, creativity and culture), meeting its ob-
jectives of generating public and private policy based
 WN
BAWB 9

on the concept of interdependence and aimed at quality Development, Solidary Currency).

of life of humanity on the planet. Some vectors of this
success have been multisectoral management, cross-
cutting education, collaborative production, network
action and community empowerment.
It is about reconsidering wealth as “abundance that
does not generate scarcity.”
• Definition of the parent institution that will coordinate the
process, and of the seed group.
• Preparatory research carried out by the seed group.
MEDIUM-TERM ACTIONS:  
• Distribution of preparatory material resulting from the
research.

ASPIRATIONAL SYNTHESIS
Reinventing the Economy: “Multidimensional Wealth
Indicators generate Whole Sustainability for mankind
and the planet.”
PROTOTYPE:
The Multidimensional Wealth Index includes:
aa) Currencies/metrics related to the four dimensions of
Whole Sustainability (economic, environmental, social and
cultural) that allow for their measurement, assessment,
and exchange. Measuring development and sustainability
only by the economic value is like trying to measure liters
with a ruler. Human and cultural capital; social capital;
technological and environmental capital enable the
cultural and natural diversities, solidarity, articulation,
traditional knowledge and actions, and creativity to
integrate the sustainable development equation.
b) Set of wealth indicators guided by the concept of
interdependence and human values and that, when
covering the four dimensions of Whole Sustainability,
will reach a balance among the material, tangible and
intangible sides aimed at quality of life.
c) Legislation and policies that transform and rule the
economic, social and environmental flows that will enable
the application of IMR.
WHO IS AND SHOULD BE INVOLVED: 
• Multisectoral (public, private, organized civil society,
creative people) and cross-cutting Task Force to design
the basis of the process that would be then developed by
cross-cutting work groups. Axis: sustainability, innovation,
development, cooperation.
• Institutions whose work is already related to the theme;
selection of professionals with cross-cutting profile from
educational institutions (environment; law, commerce,
culture, politics, development, etc), including ‘users’ and
‘researchers’ (balance between theory and practice). The
Group should include many areas besides the economic one.
• First meeting of the Task Force to define the bases of the
project and decide on the work groups in each module.
SHORT-TERM ACTIONS: 
Work groups in the three modules.
• Year 1: first draft presented: next, a campaign to lay the
ground, to be conducted by the society already mobilized
• Year 2: pilot experience (eg. municipality), monitoring,
necessary adjustments – campaign multiplies results
reached and starts laying the ground for others.
• Year 3: implementation of beta version at higher level
(eg. State) – start awareness/mobilization campaign at
even higher levels: abroad – Design of communication/
mobilization campaign to lay the ground for the change, to
be run simultaneously with the work groups.
WHO AND WHAT IS NECESSARY FOR IT TO BE
SUCCESSFUL:
• Institution that can host and coordinate the start of the
process, with resources and power of engagement to set up
the Seed Group to start the process.
• Seed Group: people and institutions of cross-cutting
nature and focused on human and sustainable development
that already work on the theme.
• Optional: a series of articles that can lay the ground for
the issue, showing its relevance.
CREDITS
Lala Deheinzelin www.enthusiasmo.com.br

SHORT-TERM ACTIONS:  
• Search for institutions and names to integrate the initial
Task Force (Currencies Module, Indicators Module, Flow
Regulation Module).
• Antecedents: experience in and information on the theme
(eg. GNH, ICONS 2003, Sustainability Indicators of Nations
and other publications, Creative Economy and Sustainable

107
 10 Global Action
Ação Global
(Global Action)
“He who does not have citizenship is either
marginalized or excluded from social life and
decision-making, feeling inferior within the
social group.” Dalmo de Abreu Dallari
How can we talk about wealth and happiness indica-
tors of nations in a country where part of its popu-
lation is formally excluded from society, without any
basic citizen rights?
They have families, dreams and stories to tell. Howe-
ver, in practice, they do not exist for the society. They
are men and women that spend a lifetime in limbo,
unable to interfere in their own reality for lack of ac-
cess to one or more basic rights of every citizen, such
as health, education, leisure, work and a house to live
in. Coming across these Brazilians is not hard. They
are in our homes, our stores, in rural areas, but they go
unnoticed, especially because they are unaware of the
exclusion of which they are victims.
Lack of money is far from being the main problem for
more than one million Brazilians that annually attend
the Global Action. Being a social outcast, with no ac-
cess to basic citizen rights, and being, therefore, unable
to overcome this situation in the short term is worse
than living in poverty.
Among the projects undertaken by SESI (Industry So-
cial Service), one that stands out is Global Action, a
true ‘Passport to Citizenship’.
Passport to Citizenship
SESI – Industry Social Service.
108
WHAT IT IS
Global Action consists of a collective effort to offer es-
sential, integrated and free of charge services by volun-
teer professionals in the areas of health, leisure, edu-
cation and citizenship. The program is offered to the
public simultaneously in all states of Brazil and in the
Federal District. Over 40 services in one single place
with quality infrastructure and performance.
ORIGIN
It has been a SESI initiative in partnership with Globo
Network since 1991. It was originally created by the
Minas Gerais SESI and was later expanded nationwide
in 1995.
OBJECTIVE
The Global Action’s mission is to help reduce the so-
cial inequalities in Brazil. The event benefits thousands
of Brazilians every year and ensures free access to a
number of services that foster citizenship. In the last
decade only, the program has rendered over 35 million
services.
CONTENT
In order to have many outcast Brazilians recover their
citizenship, the event provides easy access to essential
rights. Four basic rights of any citizen are made availa-
ble to the public free of charge: documentation, health,
leisure and professionalization.
RESULT
Over 12.4 million people have been benefited and
more than 26 million services have been rendered.
Participants’ profile: 66.4% have family income lower
than two minimum wages, 59.8% of adult visitors are
between 18 and 39 years old, and 76.6% are women.
The 1st Global Action Impact Assessment Scientific Re-
search, conducted in 2007, showed that people get to
the event without access to basic citizen rights. On a
scale ranging from minus 65 points (total lack of rights)
to plus 65 points (full citizenship), participants reached
minus 2.01 points. They are, therefore, below the mini-
mum level of citizenship required to live (zero point).
This perception reveals the exclusion experienced by
Brazilians that get to the event and allows mapping the
program’s impact on their lives in the short and me-
dium term.

The study showed, among other countless data, that
some of the services offered by the Global Action –
such as the access to documentation and medical ap-
pointments, leisure and professionalizing activities –
helped increase by 11.93 points the rate obtained by
men and women assisted by the program in 2007. Two
months after being provided with one or more services
by the Global Action, these people crossed the line that
separates access to minimum citizen rights and are in
the positive side of the scale with 9.92 points. Why is
this evolution so important? Specialists are unanimous
in saying that citizenship is the basic pre-requisite for
anyone to grow as a person and professionally. The re-
ason is quite simple: those who are healthy and have a
résumé – two of the indicators assessed in this survey
– have far more chance of finding a job. If they have
an employment book (document issued immediately
by the Global Action), they can enter the desired for-
mal market. Once hired, they will be entitled to social
security, unemployment compensation, and to the go-
vernment severance indemnity fund (FGTS), let alone
the increase in income.
The young people are the main beneficiary of the Glo-
bal Action. They get to the event at almost minus eight
points in the Citizenship Scale and leave at around plus
seven points. That is a 14.68 point variation in only 24
hours.
The Global Action is a program directly related to the
Reduction in Regional and Social Inequalities result re-
ferred to in the Industry Strategic Map, which uses the
GINI Index and the HDI as indicators
REFERENCE
www.sesi.org.br
1ª Pesquisa Científica de Avaliação de Impacto da Ação
Global (1st Global Action Impact Assessment Scientific
Research)
Global Action 10
A Global 10
Social responsibility in Brazil has developed side by
side with SESI’s history. Founded during the Vargas Era,
the Industry Social Service was born together with key
achievements for the worker’s quality of life, headed by
the CLT – Labor Code.
SESI is not only a pioneer, but an agent of change. For
over 60 years, it has served the industrial workers with
great care, working for their well-being and health.
Everything started out as a simple vision: people are the
driving force and the reason why industrial companies
exist; the rest is machinery.
Ensuring the exercise of citizenship by industrial
workers and their families is SESI’s challenge. For this
purpose, besides the physical structure with activity
centers, summer camps and worker’s clubs, the institu-
tion offers programs like the Global Action and Cozi-
nha Brasil (Brazil Kitchen). Health promotion initiati-
ves integrate SESI’s initiatives agenda, which encourage
the industrial worker to live a healthier life.
As a complement to the service rendered to the in-
dustrial community, SESI fosters socially responsible
management in the companies, thus contributing to
competitiveness and sustainable development in Brazil.
One example of this line of action is PSQT – SESI Qua-
lity at Work Award.
In the last 60 years, SESI has won the trust of thou-
sands of Brazilians thanks to an ethical and transparent
work committed to social inclusion. Leisure, health and
education are the pillars of the network’s investments;
a network that is present in the 26 Brazilian states and
in the Federal District, serving a total of 2,006 munici-
palities. This structure gives SESI a regular presence in
the worker’s life
109
 4
Ecolabeling
initiatives in the world
•1 •4

5•

• ••
• • •• •17
•2
•
•18 •19
•14
•16 •20
21•

•22

•3
•23
•15

•24

• 1 – Canada • 9 – Croatia • 17 – China

•6
•7 • 2 – United States • 10 – Hungary • 18 – Korea
• 12 11 • • 10
8••9 • 3 – Brazil • 11 – Austria • 19 – Japan

• 4 – Sweden • 12 – France • 20 – Taiwan

• 13
• 5 – Scandinavia • 13 – Spain • 21 – Thailand

• 6 – Netherlands • 14 – Israel • 22 – Singapore

• 7 – Czech Republic • 15 – Zimbabwe • 23 – Australia

• 8 – Slovakia • 16 – India • 24 – New Zealand

110

Introduction
“Ecolabelling” is a voluntary method of environmental
performance certification and labelling that is practised
around the world. An “ecolabel” is a label which iden-
tifies overall environmental preference of a product or
service within a specific product/service category ba-
sed on life cycle considerations. In contrast to “green”
symbols or claim statements developed by manufac-
turers and service providers, an ecolabel is awarded by
an impartial third-party in relation to certain products
or services that are independently determined to meet
environmental leadership criteria.
There are many different voluntary (and mandatory) en-
vironmental performance labels and declarations. The
International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
has identified three broad types of voluntary labels, with
ecolabelling fitting under the Type I designation.
Voluntary Environmental Performance Labelling --
ISO Definitions
Type I -- a voluntary, multiple-criteria based, third party
program that awards a license that authorizes the use
of environmental labels on products indicating overall
environmental preferability of a product within a particular
product category based on life cycle considerations
Type II -- informative environmental self-declaration claims
Type III -- voluntary programs that provide quantified
environmental data of a product, under pre-set categories of
parameters set by a qualified third party and based on life
cycle assessment, and verified by that or another qualified
third party
Further, the ISO has identified that these labels share
a common goal, which is:”...through communication of
verifiable and accurate information, that is not mislea-
ding, on environmental aspects of products and servi-
ces, to encourage the demand for and supply of those
products and services that cause less stress on the envi-
ronment, thereby stimulating the potential for market-
driven continuous environmental improvement.”
The roots of ecolabelling can be found in growing glo-
bal concern for environmental protection on the part of
governments, businesses and the public. As businesses
have come to recognize that environmental concerns
may be translated into a market advantage for certain
products and services, various environmental declara-
tions/claims/labels have emerged on products and with
respect to services in the marketplace (e.g. natural,
recyclable, eco-friendly, low energy, recycled content,
etc.). While these have attracted consumers looking for
ways to reduce adverse environmental impacts throu-
gh their purchasing choices, they have also led to some
confusion and scepticism on the part of consumers.
Without guiding standards and investigation by an inde-
pendent third party, consumers may not be certain that
the companies’ assertions guarantee that each labelled
product or service is an environmentally preferable alter-
native. This concern with credibility and impartiality has
led to the formation of both private and public organiza-
WN 1
Intro
tions providing third-party labelling. In many instances,
such labelling has taken the form of ecolabels awarded to
products approved by an ecolabelling program operated
at a national or regional (i.e. multi-countries) level.
For further information and elaboration on ecolabelling
strategies, issues and practices, consult the following
references: www.gen.gr.jp/publications.html
Global Ecolabelling
WHAT IT IS
The Global Ecolabelling Network, GEN, is a non-profit
organisation comprising members from ecolabelling
organisations from all over the world.
COUNTRY
GEN’s head office is in Canada.
ORIGIN
After the introduction of Germany’s Blue Angel as the first
environmental label world-wide in 1978 other European
and non-European countries followed this example and
introduced their own national and supra-regional environ-
mental labels.
In 1994, some countries united to form the Global Ecola-
belling Network (GEN) - a non-profit interest group com-
posed of eco-label organisations throughout the world.
GEN fosters information exchange about national eco-la-
bel activities around the world. International co-ordination
is to promote a progressive development of eco-label pro-
grammes in the individual states, especially in those coun-
tries which still wish to introduce an eco-labelling system.
Currently, the 28 GEN member organisations include
organisations from Belgium, Brazil, China, Denmark,
Germany, Greece, United Kingdom, Hong Kong (Spe-
cial Administrative Region), Hong Kong (HKFEP), India,
Israel, Japan, Canada, Korea, Croatia, Luxembourg, New
Zealand, Norway, Hungary, Spain, Sweden (SIS), Sweden
(SSNC), Sweden (TCO), Zimbabwe, Thailand, Czech Re-
public, United States of America.
OBJECTIVE
The organisation was formed in 1994 with the aim of im-
proving and developing ecolabelling worldwide. Throu-
gh GEN, the various national organisations exchange
information and offer each other technical assistance.
CONTENT
The common goal of these labels is to inform consu-
mers about environmentally friendly products thereby
giving global support to a product-related environ-
mental protection.
Referencias
www.gen.gr.jp
111
 1 Intro

Iniciativas de selos CANADA

ecológicos no mundo ECOLOGOM (1988)

Environmental Choice Program (ECP).
ECP is the second oldest world environmental standard and
certification organization, just after German Blue Angel.
The program is managed and controlled by TerraChoice
Environmental Marketing Inc., a private company.
GERMANY 3000 products from 120 categories.
Websites: www.environmentalchoice.ca/
www.terrachoice.com
FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCY
Site: www.blauer-engel.de CHINA

AUSTRALIA
HUAN” (193)
Environmental Protection Administration Chinês.
Certification criteria for 51 product groups. Over 12,000
products from 2,000 companies.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHOICE (1991) Websites: www.zhb.gov.cn/english
“Environmental Choice Australia” was launched in 2001. english.sepa.gov.cn/
www.aela.org.au/mrachina.htm
Good Environmental Choice Australia Ltd
Certification criteria for 20 product groups.
COREIA
Website: www.aela.org.au/homefront.htm

austria
KOREA ECO-LABEL (1992)
An initiative from the government of the Republic of Korea.
Controlled and organized by the Korea Environmental
UMWELTZEICHEN-BÄUME (1990) Labeling Association (KELA).
Austria’s Environment Ministry. The label is granted mainly based on product life cycle
analyses.
The Consumer Information Association (für
Konsumenteninformation de Verein - VKI) manages and sets Certification criteria for 85 categories and approximately
the criteria. 700 products.
Criteria for 50 products. Website: www.kela.or.kr/english
Website: www.umweltzeichen.at
CROACIA
BRAzIL

ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY (1993)

QUALIDADE AMBIENTAL (1993)
Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (ABNT), in
cooperation with the government. The label is granted based
on product life cycle analyses.
Website: www.abnt.org.br
Designed after the EU flower and German’s Blue Angel.
Ministry of Environmental Protection and Physical
Planning, Environmental Protection Division and the
Department for EU Integration and International Projects of
Croatia
Used by 12 manufacturers in 26 product categories.
Website: www.mzopu.hr/default.aspx?id=5145.

112
 Intro 1

UNITED STATES CHINA

GREEN SEAL (1989)

Green Seal, independent, nonprofit, nongovernmental
organization, although its principles are similar to those of
national, government-supported standards systems.
300 products from 31 categories.
Website: www.greenseal.org
SLOVAKIA
“GREEN LABEL” (2000)
Controlled and granted by the Green Council (GC), a
nongovernmental organization, in cooperation with the Hong
Kong Productivity Council (HKPC).
Certification criteria for 35 product groups.
Website: www.greencouncil.org/

HONG KONG FEDERATION

ENVIRONMENTÁLNE VHODNÝ VÝROBOK (1996) OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (HKFEP)
Slovakian Environment Ministry. Nongovernmental organization. Certification criteria for 16
29 products from 21 groups bear the label. types of product.
Website: www.sazp.sk/public/index/go.php?id=785 Website: www.greencouncil.org/

SPAIN HUNGARy

AENOR MEDIO AMBIENTE (1993)

Associación Espanola de Normalización y
Certificación (AENOR), an institution reporting
to the Spanish Ministry for Industry and Energy.
The Spanish program is very similar to the French
program, which is controlled and managed by a standards
authority.
11 product groups and 400 accredited products.
Website: www.aenor.es/desarrollo/certificacion/productos/
tipo.asp?tipop=2#1
PHILIPPINESS
KÖRNYEZETBARÁT TERMÉK (1994)
Ministry of the Environment and Regional Development.
The system is controlled and managed by the Hungarian
standards organization.
43 product categories and 270 products.
Websites: www.okocimke.kvvm.hu/public_
eng/?ppid=2200000 ou www.kornyezetbarat-termek.hu/
angism.htm
INDIA

GREEN CHOICE PHILIPPINES (2001)

Initiative of the government of the Philippines, it is
controlled by the independent foundation Clean & Green
Foundation, Inc.
Website: www.epic.org.ph/product.htm
FRANce
ECOMARK (1991)
India is one of the few countries that grant its label to food
products. Another specific characteristic is that the draft
criteria are disclosed.
Certification criteria for 16 types of products.
Website: envfor.nic.in/cpcb/ecomark/ecomark.html

“NF ENVIRONNEMENT” (1992) INDONESIA

Initiative of the French government in cooperation with the
French standards organization AFNOR.
This close cooperation system between the government and
the standards organizations are repeatedly adopted by other
ecolabeling programs. EKOLABEL INDONESIA
400 products under 10 licensed categories. Ministry of Environment
Website: www.afnor.fr/portail.asp?Lang=English Site: www.menlh.go.id

113
 1 Intro
ISRAEL
GREEN LABEL – THE STANDARDS
INSTITUTION OF ISRAEL
Organized and controlled by the Environment Ministry
Committee and the Standard Institute of Israel (SII). (1993)
Certification criteria for 11 product groups and a total of
approximately 82 licensed products.
Website: www.sii.org.il/siisite.nsf/Pages/GreenMark
JAPan
ECO MARK (1989)
Japan Environment Association (JEA), in cooperation with
the Ministry of Environment and a Japanese environmental
association.
Japan was one of the first countries, together with
Germany, Scandinavia and Canada, to introduce
ecolabeling systems.
Certification criteria for 64 product groups and 5,000
products.
Website: www.ecomark.jp/english/
NETHERLANDS
MILIEUKEUR (1992)
Ministry of Environment and Economics, in cooperation
with Stichting Milieukeur, a private organization. Stichting
Milieukeur is responsible for setting the criteria and
monitoring. Since 1995, the program has also included
environmental criteria for agricultural products.
Criteria for 35 product groups and 300 licensed products,
not including food products.
Website: www.milieukeur.nl
www.milieukeur.nl/nl-NL/default.aspx
NEW ZEALAND
ENVIRONMENTAL CHOICE
NEW ZEALAND (1990)
New Zeland’s Environment Ministry.
Accomplished and controlled by Terlac, an authority
responsible for technical tasks, quality systems, accreditations
and certification.
There are 120 licensed products within 25 categories.
Website: www.enviro-choice.org.nz
114
CZECH REPUBLIC
EKOLOGICKY SETRANY VYROBEK (1993)
Czech Environment Ministry
One characteristic of the system is that the environment
minister decides on the granting criteria for product groups.
Criteria for 32 product groups and 75 companies.
Website: www.ekoznacka.cz/ENG/
SINGAPORE
GREEN LABEL SINGAPORE (1992)
Singapore’s Environment Ministry.
Since 1999, it has been controlled by the Singapore
Environmental Council, a nongovernmental organization.
Like India, the draft criteria are disclosed.
Certification criteria for 35 product groups.
Website: www.sec.org.sg/greenlabel_htm/greenlable_
frameset.htm
SWEDEN
MILJÖMÄRKT
THE WHITE SWAN” (NORDIC SWAN LABEL)
(1989)
Nordic Council of Ministers, a multinational body comprised
by Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland and Denmark.
Criteria have been set for 60 product groups and 630
products.
Website: www.svanen.nu/Eng/
BRA MILJÖVAL (1992)
Swedish Society for Nature Conservation (SSNC), Sweden
NGO since 1987.
Like the American label Green Seal, it is not a national
label as it is not a governmental initiative.
At the same time, Sweden has also launched its “White
Swan” label.
The two programs coexist in a healthy competition.
Product criteria for 13 product groups.
Website: www.snf.se/bmv/english-more.cfm
 Intro 1

TCO (SWEDISH
CONFEDERATION OF
PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES)
It is a nongovernmental initiative.
TCO 99 is an upgraded version of successful labels such as
TCO 92 and TCO 95.
Label for particularly efficient, easy-to-use and
environmentally friendly computers.
Website: www.tcodevelopment.com

TAIWAN

GREEN MARK (1992)

Environmental Protection Administration (EPA). Managed by
the Environment and Development Foundation.
Certification criteria for 1,300 products within 84 categories.
Website: www.greenmark.epa.gov.tw/english/index.asp
www.greenmark.org.tw/

THAILAND

GREEN LABEL: THAILAND (1994)

Thailand Environment Institute (TEI), in association with the
Ministry of Industry.
Certification criteria for 32 product groups and 150
products.
Website: www.tei.or.th/bep/GL_home.htm

UKRAINE

THE PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT OF

ECOLOGICAL MARKING IN UKRAINE
Living Planet
Site: www.ecolabel.org.ua/

EUROPEAN UNION

European Commission - DG ENVIRONMENT

Website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/
ecolabel/index.htm
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs(Defra)
European Union Ecolabel Award Scheme
site : www.defra.gov.uk/environment/consumerprod/ecolabel/
index

115
 2 Bra Miljöval

Bra Miljöval
The ecolabelling also includes the internationally introdu-
ced labelling system of TCO ‘95 and ‘99 on computers.

WHAT IT IS
Bra Miljöval is the ecolabel of SSNC- Swedish Socie-
ty for Nature Conservation - SSNC. It is referred to as
“Good Green Buy” or “Good Environmental Choice”.
STEP BY STEP
Every product affects the environment in several ways
during the different phases of its life cycle. We must
consider how the raw materials are extracted (or what
is consumed in providing a service). We must also think
about how the product is made and what happens to it
when it has been used and discarded. This method of
assessing the total environmental impact of a product
is usually called a life cycle analysis.
ReferencE
www.snf.se/bmv/english.cfm

COUNTRY
Suécia

ORIGIN
SSNC started ecolabelling in 1988. The SSNC is
Sweden’s largest democratic environmental organisa-
tion, and at the same time nature’s defence advocate
and green consumer ombudsman. Is the biggest na-
ture conservation and environmental organisation in
Sweden with 170 000 members and 274 local branches
across the whole country
SSNC acts as a sort of consumer ombudsman, or en-
vironmental ombudsman. The work is divided among
273 local groups and 23 county associations around
the country.

ObjeCtivE
Decisions on whom to contract and what to buy due
to environmental aspects, are important as a driving
force towards sustainability. Greening Office Project
helps to put up relevant environmental criteria for
procurement purposes.

CONTENT
The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation is curren-
tly involved in eco-labelling products in thirteen different
criteria groups: Laundry detergents • stain removers and
bleaches • cleaners • toilet cleansers • dishwasher deter-
gents • washing-up detergents • soap and shampoos • pa-
per • nappies and similar products • textiles • electricity
supplies • passenger transport • goods transport.

116

Blue Angel
WHAT IT IS
The Blue Angel (Blauer Engel) is a German certification
for products and services that have environmentally
friendly aspects. The Blue Angel is the first and oldest
environment-related label in the world for products
and services.
COUNTRY
Alemanha
OrigIN
The certificate has been awarded since 1978 by the
Jury Umweltzeichen, a group of 13 persons from en-
vironment and consumer protection groups, industry,
unions, trade, media and churches.
It was created in 1977 on the initiative of the Federal
Minister of the Interior and approved by the Ministers
of the Environment of the national government and the
federal states.
The Blue Angel environmental label is the property of the
Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature Protection
and Nuclear Safety. It is sponsored and administered by
the Federal Environmental Agency and the quality as-
surance and product labelling institute RAL Deutsches
Institut für Gütesicherung und Kennzeichnung e.V. All
technical demands placed on products and services for
the award of the Environmental Label are decided by the
independent Environmental Label jury. The award of the
Blue Angel is entrusted to the RAL Deutsches Institut für
Gütesicherung und Kennzeichnung e.V. – with the par-
ticipation of the Federal Environmental Agency and the
federal state in which the manufacturer or supplier of
the respective product or service has its registered office.
The Federal Environmental Agency is responsible, among
other things, for the development of requirements for the
award of the Blue Angel – and the Environmental Label
jury has its office in the Federal Environmental Agency.
Blue Angel 3
ObjeCtivE
It was designed as an instrument of environmental policy
which would harmonise with the market and enable the
positive features of products and services to be labelled on
a voluntary basis. As a result, it fits in well with the com-
petition for the best possible ecological properties of pro-
ducts and services.
The benefits of the Blue Angel for consumers are clear:
they are given practical guidance to help them considera-
bly in their selection and their decisions on what to buy.
The Blue Angel provides much of what consumers want.
For example, the Blue Angel helps consumers to save mo-
ney because they decide to buy products with an excellent
quality and a long service life – or by simply saving energy.
the Blue Angel promotes the concerns of both environ-
mental protection and consumer protection. Therefore it
is awarded to products and services which are particularly
beneficial for the environment in an all-round considera-
tion and which also fulfil high standards of occupational
health and safety and fitness for use.
CONTENT
Now, about 3,700 products and services in 80 product
categories bear the Blue Angel
Results
After the introduction of Germany’s Blue Angel in
1978 as the first world-wide environmental label, other
European and non-European countries followed this
example and introduced their own national and supra-
regional environmental labels. The common goal of
these labels is to inform consumers about environmen-
tally friendly products thereby giving global support to
product-related environmental protection.
In 1994, some countries cooperated in developing the
Global Ecolabelling Network (GEN) - a non-profit inte-
rest group composed of eco-label organisations throu-
ghout the world.
The success story of the Blue Angel has now continued
for almost 30 years. About 3.600 products and servi-
ces from approximately 580 label users in Germany and
abroad are entitled to bear the Blue Angel.
ReferencE
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Angel_(certification)
www.blauer-engel.de/willkommen/willkommen.htm
117
 4 Bio-siegel

Bio-siegel

WHAT IT IS
“Bio-siegel” is the label granted by the Federal Ministry
for Consumer Protection to organically grown agricul-
tural products and foods.

Country
Germany

content
These products must comply with the provisions of the EU
Organic Farming Regulation (2092/91).

STEP BY STEP
The attainment of Bio-siegel label is a hard task for the
companies willing to bear it, for it determines tight
control over the production, processing and sale of
agricultural foods, which is carried out annually and
encompass all the phases between production and pa-
ckaging.
The interest of the population for this label has increa-
sed considerably in recent years, due to “scandals” re-
lated to foods that posed risks to public health. These
products now go through a strict control, including:
- Ban on irradiation of organic food.
- Ban on genetically modified organisms.
- Renouncement of crop protection with synthetic
chemicals.
- Renouncement of mineral fertilizers of low solubility.

In addition, they must comply with several require-

ments, such as:
- Appropriate livestock husbandry.
- Organically produced feeding stuffs for feeding of livestock
with no antibiotics or growth promoters added.
- Diversified wide crop rotations.

REFERENCE
www.bio-siegel.de

118
 KRAV 5

KRAV STEP BY STEP

The KRAV-label is a registered brand. Only the com-
panies that have signed a contract with KRAV and are
authorized by KRAV may use the name KRAV or the
KRAV-label on a product. The label shall always be ac-
companied by the name of the producer.
Every three years the standards are revised, taking into
account the information and opinion of all stakehol-
ders. The content and formulation are defined by the
Krav Standards Committee. The final decision is made
by the Board of Directors.
WHAT IT IS
Production outside Sweden should be certified by a
Ecolabel that ensures the food is organic, that is, gro- certification body which KRAV has an agreement with,
wn without the use of artificial fertilizers and chemical preferably an IFOAM-accredited certification body.
pesticides.
Results
COUNTRY
Krav certifies hundreds of products. All certified pro-
Sweden ducts are published on the website (only in Swedish):

ORIGIN www.krav.se/produktlista/

KrKrav is an active member of IFOAM – Internatio- Referências

nal Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements, an www.krav.se/espanol.asp
umbrella organization which gathers organizations for Standards: arkiv.krav.se/arkiv/regler/senasteEnglish
farmers, scientists, educationalists and certifiers from
almost every country in the world.
It takes an active part in developing the Ifoam standar-
ds and also works to influence the EU organic produc-
tion legislation. KRAV also works closely with Grolink
AB, which specializes in consultancy work in develo-
ping countries, such as establishing certifying organi-
zations.
The organization has 28 members, who represent far-
mers, processors, trade, and also consumer, environ-
mental and animal welfare interests.

ObjeCtivE
Krav is a key player in the organic market in Sweden.
Krav is authorized by the Swedish National Board of
Agriculture and the Swedish National Food Adminis-
tration to carry out inspection of organic production
in Sweden.

CONTENT
Note: Krav standards ban the use of GMOs and GMO
raw materials in certified products.
Standards available at http://arkiv.krav.se/arkiv/regler/
senasteEnglish.pdf.

119
 6 The Nordic Swan

The Nordic Swan ContENT

The green symbol is available for around 60 product

groups for which it is felt that ecolabelling is needed
and will be beneficial.
• The Swan takes into consideration the product’s impact
on the environment from the raw material to waste i.e.
throughout the product’s lifecycle.

• The Swan also sets criteria with regard to quality and

performance. The product must offer at features which are
at least as good as other similar products.

• To ensure that a Swan-labelled product is always at the

WHAT IT IS cutting edge from an environmental point-of-view, criteria
are revised repeatedly.
A product carrying the Swan label meets extremely
high environmental standards.
STEP BY STEP
COUNTRY The Swan checks that products fulfil certain criteria
using methods such as samples from independent la-
Suécia
boratories, certificates and control visits. The label is
usually valid for three years, after which the criteria are
ORIGIN
revised and the company must reapply for a licence. In
The Swan is the official Nordic ecolabel, introduced by this way, we ensure that products better suited to the
the Nordic Council of Ministers. In 1989, the Nordic environment are constantly being developed. Compa-
Council of Ministers decided to introduce a common, nies applying for a licence to use the Swan label must
official environmental label in Nordic. The Swan was provide results from independent testing to prove that
chosen as a symbol, a variation on the logo of the Nor- the criteria have been met.
dic Council of Ministers.
Results
The Nordic countries work together using the Swan eco-
label. This work is co-ordinated by the Nordic Ecolabelling
RefereCE
Board, NMN, which has produced a set of regulations.
www.svanen.nu/Eng/
NMN determines which products can be covered by
the Swan and the criteria they must meet. Decisions
taken by NMN must always be unanimous. Groups
of experts from the Nordic countries develop propo-
sals for criteria. The group representatives come from
government, environmental organisations, trade and
industry. Before NMN finalises the proposals, they
are sent out for review. Once a criteria document has
been finalised, businesses can apply for the right to
use the label on a product which falls into this cate-
gory. The national offices manage licence applications
and grant licences.

ObjeCtivE

The Swan logo demonstrates that a product is a good

environmental choice. “Choose products displaying the
Swan label,and take a step towards a better environment!”

120
 UE Flower 7

UE Flower Product groups

• Tissue Paper
• Copying Paper
• Dishwashers
• Light Bulbs
• Bed Mattresses
• Personal Computers
• Detergents for dishwashers
• Footwear
• Portable Computers
• Paints and Varnishes
• Textile Products
• Refrigerators
• Laundry Detergents
• Soil Improvers
WHAT IT IS
• Washing-up Liquid
Ecolabel that distinguishes and tests greener, more en- • Tourist Accommodation
vironmentally friendly, products (not including food
• Furniture
and medicine). The services or products that bear this
label are high quality and economical. • Hard Floor Coverings
• Television
COUNTRY • Vacuum Cleaners
• All Purpose Cleaners
European Union

STEP BY STEP
ORIGIN
The EU Eco-label scheme has drawn up a set of environ-
The EU ecolabel is managed by the European Union
mental and performance criteria for judging products.
Eco-labelling Board (EUEB), and is supported by the
Only if products meet all the criteria can they be awar-
European Commission, the Member States of the Euro-
ded the EU Eco-label. These environmental criteria will
pean Union, and the European Economic Area (EEA).
take into account all aspects of a product’s life, from its
The European Union Eco-labelling Board consists of
production and use to its eventual disposal (cradle-to-
representatives of consumer and environment NGOs,
grave approach).
trade unions, industry, SMEs and commerce.

Results
ObjeCtivE
Twenty-three different product groups currently exist
It aims to provide simple and accurate guidance to con-
for the Eco-Label. Over 250 certificates have been
sumers. All products bearing the “Flower” have been
awarded to hundreds of products.
checked by independent bodies for complying with
strict ecological and performance criteria.
ReferENCE
ContENT http://www.eco-label.com/french/
The EU Eco-label scheme is open to any product or ser-
vice, except food, drink, pharmaceuticals and medical
devices. There are currently twenty-three product cate-
gories which can receive this award, ranging from tourist
accommodation service, home appliances, cleaning ma-
terials, and mattresses to office supplies, gardening and
Do It Yourself products.

121
patrocínio

patrocínio cultural lei rouanet

apoio institucional