•  

Ecologically Sustainable Development

Are We Sustaining Australia? Report Against Headline Sustainabilty Indicators

Environment Australia, 2002
ISBN 0 642 54771 8

---

Executive Summary

The indicators in this Report aim to measure national performance against the core objectives of the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (NSESD). The indicator set has been developed in consultation with all Commonwealth agencies, other jurisdictions, key stakeholders and the general public. The set is not intended to be comprehensive but rather to give a broad view, reflecting on a wide range of issues with a relatively small amount of information.

The indicators must be read as a set. While each individual indicator may reflect important issues in its own right, none of the indicators, read in isolation, tells us much about sustainability. Only read together, and over time, will they tell us whether the things we need and value are being sustained without eroding other things we need or value - and hence whether our way of life is becoming sustainable.

Framework for the indicator set

The NSESD commits all Australian governments to the following three core objectives:

• to enhance individual and community well-being and welfare by following a path of economic development that safeguards the welfare of future generations;
• to provide for equity within and between generations; and
• to protect biological diversity and maintain essential ecological processes and life-support systems.

For each of these objectives, a set of "values" has been identified, each value representing one key aspect of the objective. Collective desirable trends against all of the values identified against an objective would be generally indicative that the objective is being achieved.

The first objective has been divided into two sections: direct aspects of individual and community well-being (including aspects of environmental well-being) and aspects of economic development (including aspects of natural resource management).

The second objective of the NSESD relates to both inter and intra generational equity. However, the Report includes no specific indicators of inter-generational equity. The indicator set, as a whole, is designed to tell us over time whether we are maintaining biodiversity and ecological processes, all aspects of human well-being, and an equitable distribution of these within the current population; therefore the set as a whole and over time will tell us whether we are ensuring inter-generational equity.

Intra-generational equity is measured using several indicators of the distribution of various aspects of well-being to traditionally disadvantaged sub-groups relative to the general population.

Additionally, three contextual indicators relating to population issues have been identified. These indicators do not, of themselves, indicate performance against the values identified for each objective, but they do provide the context in which the "value" indicators need to be read.

Organisation of report

This Report is organised to reflect the values which have been identified as relating to each core objective of the NSESD. A rationale for the inclusion of the value against that objective has been provided. For each value, one or more indicators has been identified. The rationale for selection of the indicator, along with any explanation of what the indicator means, if needed, is given. An explanation of what the data themselves mean, and any useful elaborative or trend information relating to the data is then provided.

Selection of indicators

Each indicator in this set is selected as the most representative, significant or comprehensible from a much more extensive parent set, such as SoE reporting or ABS publications, or the National Land and Water Resources Audit (NLWRA). The chosen indicator is only one of many that might have been selected. The parent set is the data source for the indicator and also provides the context in which data for the indicator have been collected. The Report references the source and parent set of each headline indicator.

As far as possible, all the indicators which have been chosen are:

• relevant to NSESD objectives;
• scientifically and statistically credible;
• sensitive to change;
• reliant on data which are already available in other contexts;
• reasonably easy to understand.

Supplementary indicators

A list of supplementary indicators which may provide check points for whether the headline indicator is giving the whole story is also provided, but data against these supplementary indicators are not provided in this report.

Purpose of this report

The indicators in this Report provide a base line against which future trends towards or away from the objectives of the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (NSESD) can be measured.

It is not possible from this first Report to assess whether or not our way of life is sustainable. This is because there are no time series data as yet for several of the indicators of ecological integrity and biodiversity, and there are limited time series data for the indicators of natural resource management and for the environmental and some of the social aspects of individual and community well-being. Rather, this Report provides a snapshot against which future trends can be seen.

Summary of data

Contextual indicators: Population

Time series data show that Australia's population has been steadily growing, ageing and concentrating itself in urban areas. In general, at the same time, per capita consumption and waste generation are increasing. Actual population trends also need to be read in the context of fertility, mortality and immigration rates.

Main Set

Some time series data for indicators of progress against the objective of enhancing individual and community well-being and welfare, particularly the social and economic indicators, are available. Generally these data show that most of the aspects of our well-being that are measured by social and economic indicators are slowly improving.

More time series data on the environmental aspects of individual and community well-being are needed to determine whether we are sustaining all aspects of individual and community well-being. Additionally, indicators for social cohesion (or social capital) and community infrastructure still need to be identified and populated, to round out the picture.

Time series data are available for most of the economic indicators and show that, generally, our economic development is continuing in a positive direction. However, time series data will need to be examined for the natural resource management indicators for water, forests and fish before any definitive assessment can be made of whether we are sustaining our economic well-being.

Trend data based on this very limited set of indicators seem to show that, while significant inequities exist based on gender, socio-economic status and location, our community seems to be gradually becoming more equitable in regard to some aspects of socio-economic and locational disadvantage.

Since most of the agreed headline indicators for these values have been developed very recently, there are no time series data on which to base an assessment of whether or not we are sustaining the ecological systems on which life depends. Since European settlement, there has been a decline from 100 per cent of bio-geographic sub-regions with 100 per cent of original vegetative cover, and from 100 per cent of estuaries, rivers and catchments in pristine condition. However, in terms of what is happening now, these indicators provide baseline data only. The only indicators in this section for which time series data are available are "the number of extinct, endangered and vulnerable species" which appears to have increased by 37 per cent since 1993, and "net greenhouse gas emissions" which shows that our net emissions are still increasing. However, trends in "the number of extinct, endangered and vulnerable species" reflect the number of species which have been legally recognised as threatened or extinct and added to the list since 1993. These changes are therefore as likely to result from increased knowledge/understanding or changes in taxonomy rather than an actual increase in the number of threatened and extinct species.

Overall conclusion

From the data available, it is possible to conclude that we are generally achieving the first two parts of the first objective of the NSESD. We are enhancing most aspects of individual and community well-being and welfare by following a path of economic development.

While significant inequities still exist in the distribution of well-being within the current generation, on the basis of the very small number of indicators chosen, there is some evidence that the distribution of well-being within the current generation is becoming more equitable. We seem to be moving towards achieving the first part of the second objective of the NSESD of providing for equity within the current generation.

Our progress against the following aspects of the objectives is not clear.

• the third aspect of the first objective: whether our economic development is safeguarding the welfare of future generations;
• the second part of the second objective: whether we are providing for inter-generational equity; and
• the third objective: whether we are protecting biological diversity and maintaining essential ecological processes and life-support systems.

None of these can be achieved unless the ecological processes on which life depends are protected, and unless the natural resources on which economic and community well-being depend are managed sustainably. We do not have sufficient trend information yet in relation to the ecological and natural resource management indicators, to determine whether or not this is the case.

In other words, it is not clear whether this enhancement of individual and community well-being and any trend towards increasing intra-generational equity are sustainable. Subsequent reports against the headline indicators will begin to answer these questions.