This sub-section explores SD indicators, which can be viewed as measurable and aggregated portion of information that serve to support policymakers for better informed decisions making, learning and policy adaptation.
One of the outcomes of the depression of the 1930s was the gradual development of the SNA for examining a nation’s economy (Commission of the European Communities, 2001; IMF; OECD;
UN; Bank, World (1994).
The SNA is a well-established methodology for producing a coherent, consistent and integrated set of macro-economic accounts that cover all aspects of economic activities (Pierantoni, 2004:98).
The SNA distinguishes between measures of 'weak' and ‘strong’ sustainability (CEC et al., 1994).
On one end of the continuum, proponents of weak sustainability support the view of replacing any natural resources used with alternative resources of an equal value (Pierantoni, 2004:93). On the other end of the continuum, proponents of strong sustainability, support that renewable resources should not be used in excess of natural regeneration (Pierantoni, 2004:93).
This research attempts to contribute the alignment of the aggregate economic measures and become a visible part of the SNA. In line with the research, Table 2.3-1 provides some essential characteristics of SD indicators.
39
Table 2.3-1: Characteristics of sustainable development indicators REQUIREMENTS FOR WORKING INDICATORS
Significance The indicators have to be significant in the given context. A great variety of data may therefore be significant.
Representation It has to be clear what subject or phenomenon the indicator or the data represent.
An appropriate geographic scale has to be set, or an appropriate time scale for measurements or sampling the analyses of which form the basis for the indicators.
Uniqueness The data obtained have to be unique, must not be redundant, repetitive, or duplicating any other existing information. Each indicator has to be distinctly specific and original and must not replicate what is known from other sources.
Measurement, Obtaining
It has to be technically feasible to obtain the groundwork data. The technical aspects of measurement and sampling are one of the key issues to pay attention to when designing monitoring systems and planning measurement schedules.
Cost-
effectiveness The data obtained have to be unique, must not be redundant, repetitive, or
duplicating. Obtaining, processing and providing any data always costs something.
Information is never free of charge. Data collection, monitoring system operation, and information sources maintenance tends to be quite expensive. The requirement for cost-effectiveness is one of the fundamental, but often ignored ones.
Environmental impact
The observed subject may be damaged or even destroyed by sampling.
Measures the minimum negative environmental impact
Correction No data are absolutely correct and some error must always be considered, even though often it is minor. Indicators have to be correct, meaning that indicators must not be charged with excessive error.
Dependence The data have to be verified in terms of reliability, confirmed by several independent measurements, and the results may have to be obtained using significantly different methods. Data control and quality assurance is an entire important line of work.
Comparable Most measurement, sampling, statistical surveys etc. have internationally
standardised procedures. Correct and dependable data, however, are a precondition of comparability.
Transparency Data collection and indicator definition processes have to be transparent. There has to be clarity in methods used, how the calculations were done, and so on.
Comprehension All data and indicators assume a user, someone who takes interest in them. For any use, all data have to be comprehensible, unambiguous, and easy to present.
Communication No data, and thus no indicators, make sense as stand-alone; indicators only become meaningful in a context. The possibility to communicate the meaning of any data or indicators is an important criterion in the evaluation.
Timing Data and indicators seldom have a timeless meaning, therefore crucial to have and use indicator on a given point of time, which mostly means as quickly as possible.
Utilisation The purpose of any information – fully including data and indicators – is not separate in existence, but in utilisation. Information is a type of goods that only has a price as long as there is any interest in the information.
Source: Hřebík, Třebický and Gremlica (2006:44)
40
Indicators can be used to measure the impact of policy decisions and can be instrumental in a policy cycle when used to measure effectiveness (Pintér, Swanson & Barr, 2004:10) as illustrated in Figure 2.3-1. In this research context, the policy cycle (Figure 2.3-1) in conjunction with the identified indicators, can be used in achieving SD strategic targets.
From 1995, the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) in Swanson, and Pintér, (2006) collected extensive indicators and initiatives, focusing on the three pillars of SD. The broad list of indicators can be useful for countries’ selection across different sectors, but too broad for single country application (Chaturvedi & Srinivas, 2012:1640-1641) due to the unique and complex historical, political and natural factors (Economic Commission for Africa, ECA, 2010:35). Nevertheless, from the research perspective, the development of one’s ‘own’ set of indicators considering the unique social, economic and environmental characteristics of South Africa is crucial.
Figure 2.3-1: Policy cycle for performance assessment Source: Pintér, Swanson and Barr (2004:10)
Gordon and Craig (2001) propose the Five Capitals Model and maintain that any government or organisation has five capitals or stocks to manage: natural, social, human, financial and physical illustrated in Table 2.3-2.
Policy
Policy Application Environment
Environment Policy
Intent
Impacts
Target Group Decisions
41
Table 2.3-2: Categories of capital assets
CATEGORIES OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL ASSETS
Natural capital: the natural resource stocks from which resource flows useful for livelihoods are derived (for example land, water, wildlife, biodiversity, environmental resources).
Social capital: the social resources (for example, networks, membership of groups, relationships of trust, access to wider institutions of society) upon which people draw in pursuit of livelihoods.
Human capital: the skills, knowledge, ability to labour and good health important to the ability to pursue different livelihood strategies.
Physical capital: the basic infrastructure (for example transport, shelter, water, energy and
communications) and the production equipment and means which enable people to pursue livelihoods.
Financial capital: the financial resources which are available to people (whether savings, supplies of credit or regular remittances or pensions) and which provide them with different livelihood options.
Source: Gordon and Craig (2001:14)
Sustainable development categories include (i) physical capital: economic assets such as buildings, machines and infrastructure that are the economist’s usual concern; (ii) social capital: people’s skills and abilities as well as the institutions, relationships, and norms that shape the quality and quantity of a society's social interactions; and (iii) natural capital: natural resources, both commercial and non-commercial, and ecological services which provide the requirements for life, including food, water, energy, fibres, waste assimilation, climate stabilisation, and other life- support services; (iv) human capital, namely: knowledge, know-how, health, security (v) environmental capital, namely: natural renewable and non-renewable resources, ecological functions (Costa et al., 2010:7-8; Pierantoni, 2004:64-65). The aforementioned categories should be considered in formulation, monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of South Africa’s SD indicators.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (2003:15), in a wide ranging consultation process, selected 15 indicators shown in Table 2.3-3 as for SD headline set.
42
Table 2.3-3: Some indicators for SD headline set HEADLINE
DIMENSIONS HEADLINE INDICATORS SUPPLEMENTARY INDICATORS
Health Life expectancy at birth Proportions of people surviving to ages 50 and 70;
Infant mortality rate; Burden of disease Education
and training People aged 25–64 years with
higher education qualification Education participation rate for those aged 15–19;
Year 7/8 to Year 12 apparent retention rate.
Work Unemployment rate Long-term unemployment rate; Retrenchment rate;
Casual employees; People in part-time jobs Biodiversity Extinct, endangered and
vulnerable birds/mammals None Land
clearance Annual area of land cleared None Land
degradation Salinity, assets at risk in areas
affected None
Inland waters Water management areas, proportion where use exceeded 70% yield
Water diversions: Murray–Darling Basin; River condition (biota) index; net water use; river environment index
Air quality Fine particle concentrations,
standards exceeded Highest one hour averages of sulphur dioxide, selected regional centres; Ozone depletion Greenhouse
gases Net greenhouse gas emissions Total greenhouse gas emissions (including land clearance); CO2-e emissions
National
wealth Real national net worth per
capita. Real national assets and liabilities per capita;
demonstrated and real net foreign debt National
income Real net national disposable
income per capita. Real Gross Domestic Product per capita; proportion of the population in work; Terms of trade
Economic disadvantage- inequality
Real equalised disposable income in the second/third deciles income distribution.
Real equalised average weekly disposable income of groups of higher income households; children without employed parent. Gini coefficient
Housing No headline indicator. Households with housing affordability problems Crime Unlawful entry, assault Homicide rate; Imprisonment rates
Social
attachment No headline indicator. Participation in organised sports; voluntary work;
marriage and divorce rates; persons living alone;
homelessness; suicide; drug-related death rates Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics (2003:15)
Established environmental indicator metrics were utilised as a source of secondary data when analysing this research. The first metrics is the Environmental Performance Index and its predecessor, the Environmental Sustainability Index developed by some universities researchers at Yale and Columbia. The metrics provide indication of national performance on a variety of environmental indicators (Yale University, 2012) and comprise environmental health (air,
43
pollution, water, environmental burden of disease) and ecosystem vitality (forests, fisheries, agriculture, and climate change).
A second metric is the ecological footprint developed by the Global Footprint Network (2013).
The Footprint includes the areas for producing the resource it consumes (bio capacity), the space for accommodating buildings and roads, and the ecosystems for absorbing waste emissions such as CO2 (Global Footprint Network, 2013:1-2).
A third metric considered in this research is the global adaptation index created by the Global Adaptation Institute (GAIN, 2013), which is a pioneer in measuring the ecological resource use and resource capacity of countries. GAIN summarises a country's vulnerability in terms of food, ecosystems, habitat, health, infrastructure, and water to climate change and other global challenges in combination with the country’s readiness to improve resilience. According to the latest GAIN, (2013) Index Country Rankings, Denmark, Switzerland, Australia, Norway, United Kingdom (UK) ranked as the top 5 five countries, while Sudan, Burundi, Iraq, Democratic Republic of the Congo and Democratic People's Republic of Korea were the bottom 5 Countries as illustrated in Table 2.3-4. South Africa ranked 70 up by one point from 71 in both 2009 and 2010 (International Labour Organisation ILO, 2013).
Table 2.3-4: GAIN Index Country Rankings 2013
Source: Collated from International Labour Organisation (2013:1-2)
The World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators Framework (WGI, 2013) is one of the social sustainability indicators metrics considered in this research. The WGI (2013) reports aggregate individual governance indicators for 215 economies over the period 1996–2012 for six dimensions of governance, namely: voice and accountability; political; stability and absence of violence;
government effectiveness; regulatory quality; rule of law; and control of corruption. The ILO’s Decent Work initiative is another social sustainability indicator metric, which aims at measuring various elements relevant for labour conditions. Decent work is central to efforts to reduce poverty
RANK TOP 5COUNTRIES SCORE RANK BOTTOM 5COUNTRIES SCORE
1 Denmark 82.6 172 Sudan 39.5
2 Switzerland 82.2 173 Burundi 39.0
3 Australia 80.9 174 Iraq 39.0
4 Norway 80.7 175 Dem. Rep. of the Congo 37.9
5 United Kingdom 79.8 176 Dem. People's Rep. of
Korea 33.6
44
and a means for achieving equitable, inclusive and SD (ILO, 2013). Table 2.3-5 lists social and environmental sustainability indicators.
Table 2.3-5: Summary of indicators for social and environmental sustainability SUMMARY OF INDICATORS FOR SOCIAL
SUSTAINABILITY SUMMARY OF INDICATORS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Access to basic necessities 1. Access to sanitation
2. Access to improved drinking water 3. Access to healthcare
Vulnerability to shocks 1. Vulnerable employment 2. Extent of informal economy 3. Social safety net protection Social cohesion
1. Income Gini index 2. Social mobility 3. Youth unemployment
Environmental policy
1. Environmental regulations (stringency and enforcement)
2. Number of ratified international environmental treaties
3. Terrestrial biome protection Use of renewable resources 1. Agricultural water intensity 2. Forest cover change
3. Fish stocks’ overexploitation Degradation of the environment
1. Level of particulate matter concentration 2. CO2 intensity
3. Quality of the natural environment Source: World Economic Forum (2013:63)
Three social sustainability conceptual elements identified by the WEF (2013:64), shown in Table 2.3-5, are populations’ access to basic necessities, populations’ vulnerability to economic exclusion and assessment of social cohesion. Three environmental sustainability elements identified by the WEF (2013:64) are the policy category, the use of renewable resources and consideration of the degradation of the environment. Table 2.3-6 presents the development indicators set for the strategic priorities of the South African Ministry of Planning in the Presidency (2009:7-8).
The strategic priorities of the South African Ministry of Planning in the Presidency in Table 2.3-6 contains only economic and social sustainability indicators, with no reference to the environmental pillar indicators. All the three pillars are important for SD in South Africa. Therefore, the development of all three pillars of SD indicators is required. In the absence of a balanced three- pillar approach, South Africa is likely experiencing difficulties in assessing and monitoring the evolution and progress made. The aforementioned absence will result in difficulties in determining and implementing appropriate policies and measures for the development of a model and framework for achieving the desired strategic priorities. To this end, the next section is a review of frameworks for measuring (sustainable) development.
45
Table 2.3-6: Development indicators DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS
No. INDICATOR THEME AND NAME No. INDICATOR THEME AND NAME
ECONOMIC GROWTH EDUCATION
1. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth 39. Malaria
2. Real Per Capita GDP growth 40. Educator: Learner ratio in public schools 3. Foreign Direct Investment 41. Enrolment rates: Gross Enrolment Rate,
Gender Parity Index
4. Gross Fixed Capital Formation 42. National Senior Certificate pass rate 5. Budget Surplus or Deficit before borrowing 43. Matriculated with Mathematics Passes
6. Government Debt 44. Adult literacy rate
7. Interest Rates: Real and Nominal 45. Graduating SET Students 8. Inflation measures: CPI and CPIX SOCIAL COHESION 9. Bond Point Spreads 46. Strength of civil society 10. Expenditure on R&D 47. Voter participation 11. Foreign Trade and Payments 48. Voters per province
12. South Africa's competitiveness outlook 49. Percentage of women in legislative bodies 13. Knowledge based Economy Index 50. Confidence in a happy future for all races 14. Black Economic Empowerment Transactions 51. Public opinion on race relations
15. Black and Female Managers 52. Country going in the right direction EMPLOYMENT 53. Identity based on self-description
16. Employment 54. Pride in being South Africa
17. Unemployment 55. Number of all crimes
18. Expanded Public Works Programme 56. Contact crime
POVERTY AND INEQUALITY SAFETY AND SECURITY
19. Per Capita Income 57. Property crime
20. Living Standards Measure 58. Aggravated Robberies
21. Inequality Measure 59. Detection rate
22. Poverty Headcount Index 60. Charges referred to court 23. Poverty Gap analysis: Poverty gap index 61. Conviction rate
24. Social Assistance Support 62. Total numbers of inmates 25. People with Disabilities 63. Road accidents
HOUSEHOLD ASSETS INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
26. Dwellings 64. Peace operations
27. Potable Water 65. Democratic elected governments in Africa
28. Sanitation 66. Real GDP growths in Africa
29. Electricity 67. Sustainable tourism
30. Land Restitution 68. Mission operations and diplomats trained
31. Land Redistribution 69. Agreements
HEALTH GOOD GOVERNANCE
32. Life Expectancy 70. Tax returns
33. Infant and child mortality rate 71. Audits
34. Severe malnutrition under five 72. Corruption perceptions 35. Immunisation coverage 73. Budget Transparency
36. Maternal Mortality Ratio 74. Public opinion: Delivery of basic services
37. HIV Prevalence 75. Ease of Doing Business
38. Tuberculosis 76. Green-house gas emissions
Source: South African Ministry of Planning in the Presidency (2009:46)
46