This presentation was delivered at an international workshop meeting of the European Environment and Sustainable Development Advisory Councils (EEAC) titled ‘Safe operating space – state and perspectives as a concept for national policy’. The workshop discussed how the concept of ecological or planetary boundaries/ safe operating space (PB/SOS), which derives from the principle of sustainability, could and should possibly play a relevant role in environmental policy programmes in future political frameworks.
Check against delivery.
1. Planetary boundaries:
an EEA perspective
The speech for this presentation can be viewed in the slide notes below.
Dr Hans Bruyninckx
Executive Director, European Environment Agency
Brussels, 23 January 2014, EEAC Workshop
2. The European Environment Agency
The European Environment Agency:
an independent provider of information,
assessments and knowledge
builds bridges between science and policy
depends upon strong networks to carry out its work
33 member countries, plus 6 cooperating countries
… and publishes a report on state of, trends in and prospects for
the environment in Europe every five years (SOER)
4. Our development model appears successful...
The proportion of people living in
extreme poverty has been halved
at the global level.
The hunger reduction target is
within reach.
Over 2 billion people gained
access to improved sources of
drinking water since 1990.
The proportion of slum dwellers
in the cities and metropolises of
the developing world is declining.
5. ...but ‘development’ has damaged the environment
Global emissions of carbon
dioxide (CO2) have increased by
more than 46 per cent since
1990.
Nearly one third of marine fish
stocks have been over-exploited.
Many species are at risk of
extinction, despite an increase in
protected areas.
Decline of ecosystems accross
the board.
6. Two possible conclusions
Most MDGs have been moderately to rather successful.
– Clear goals work
– Broad political support is essential
– Transparent monitoring and reporting have an impact
The MDG indicators illustrate the lack of ‘sustainability’ of
the successes.
– Lack of clear and especially of comprehensive environmental objectives
– Lack of linkages between environmental goals and socio-economic goals
– Lack of insights into the socio-economic driving forces behind resource and
environmental degradation
7. Two possible conclusions
Most MDGs have been moderately to rather successful.
– Clear goals work
– Broad political support is essential
– Transparent monitoring and reporting have an impact
The MDG indicators illustrate the lack of ‘sustainability’ of
the successes.
– Lack of clear and especially of comprehensive environmental objectives
– Lack of linkages between environmental goals and socio-economic goals
– Lack of insights into the socio-economic driving forces behind resource and
environmental degradation
Resource use and ecosystem resilience under conditions of
globalisation and limited natural resources
10. Continued economic growth
Past and projected global economic output (2005 USD PPP), 1996–2050
Note: gross domestic
product expressed in
billion 2005 US
dollars at purchasing
power parity
Source: OECD (2013) - All Statistics - OECD iLibrary
11. Continued economic growth
Middle class population by world regions - 2009, 2020 and 2030
3500
3000
Million
2500
2000
2009
2020
1500
2030
1000
500
0
North America
Source: Kharas (2010)
EuropeCentral and South America Pacific Sub-Saharan Africa East and North Africa
Asia
Middle
13. EU Policy context
Europe 2020 Strategy
Smart, sustainable and inclusive growth.
Roadmap for a resource efficient Europe (one of seven
flagship initiatives).
7th EAP
Protect nature and strengthen ecological resilience.
Boost sustainable resource-efficient low-carbon growth.
Effectively address environment-related threats to
health.
14. Living within ecological limits
ECOSYSTEMS
SOCIO-TECHNICAL SYSTEMS
providing social needs and value
Policy
Industry
Energy system Food
system
system
Ecosystem
services
Values
system
system
Mobility
system
Science
Technology
Environmental
externalities
Market
15. Material use decoupling: EU statistics
EU-15
EU-15: AT, BE, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GR, IE, IT, LU, NL, PT, SE, UK
Source: EEA (2012) - Material resources and waste, 2012 update
EU-12
EU-12: BG, CY, CZ, EE, HU, LT, LV, MT, PL, SI, SK, RO
19. Efficiency alone does not make ecosystems resilient
Resource efficiency
Ecosystem resilience
Greenhouse gas emissions
Global climate change
Transboundary air pollution
Marine biodiversity
Air pollution
Air quality in urban areas
Maritime transport emissions
Terrestrial biodiversity
Water use
Water status
Decoupling / recycling
Ecological footprint
Key:
improving
stable /mixed progress
deteriorating
21. Efficiency gains are not sufficient on their own
Neither technology shifts
Need for systemic approach
22. The need for transitions
Persistent problems demand fundamental solutions
– Regular policy offers no solutions
– Market forces are not sufficient
– Incrementalism is not sufficient
→ Transitions
= fundamental shifts in the systems that fulfil societal
needs, through profound changes in dominant
structures, practices, technologies, policies, lifestyles, thinking
…
23. Systems thinking
Solution for persistent problems?
→ fundamental systemic changes are required
Socio-technical systems (Rotmans & Loorbach 2010)
– consist of:
• Structure: material infrastructure, technology, institutions, economic reality
• Culture: dominant images, values, paradigms
• Practices: routines, ‘normal’ system behaviour
– are linked to societal functions
– present certain dysfunctions
Fundamental changes at systemic level: ‘system innovation’
26. Nessesary but problematic agenda!
Poor understanding of key concepts:
– Old concept/discourse,
– Planetary boundaries, safe operating space,
– Popular translations: footprint, Earth Overshoot Day, there is no planet
B, we will need three planets if, …
All remain abstract and hard to concretise.
Hardly any resonance in political sphere.
Wrestling with the growth concept.
What are boundary conditions for green growth, blue growth?
Hard to move from technological efficiency paradigm to a
transitions paradigm.
27. EEA’s agenda for the next 5 years
Systemic analysis in light of transitions.
Co-creation of the necessary knowledge base.
Half-way point idea.
Specific attention.
– Ecosystem and natural resource accounting (JRC, ESTAT, RTD, …)
– Circular economy, materials transition, resource efficiency
Developing meaningful metrics and methods of analysis
(7EAP evaluation, beyond GDP process; SOER 2020).
How we live within our planet’s boundaries and how we take stock of and then use nature’s resources concerns us all.My presentation today will look at relevant global and European issues and will reflect on the how we can make a transition to more sustainable consumption and production.
Let us take a look at the global developments in consumption and its driving factors, and the resulting expected global resource use.
Is our model of development at least able to help us avoid the mistakes that we made in the developed world? This may sound surprisingly gloomy. After all, the proportion of people living in extreme poverty has been halved at the global level. The hunger reduction target of the Millennium Development Goals is within reach. Over 2 billion people gained access to improved sources of drinking water since 1990, and the proportion of slum dwellers in the cities and metropolises of the developing world is declining.
But there is a problem: the path we are currently taking to expand the middle class is not sustainable and is already causing problems for the environment.Global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) have increased by more than 46 per cent since 1990. Nearly one third of marine fish stocks have been over-exploited. Many species are at risk of extinction, despite an increase in terrestrial protected areas
This figure plots countries on the basis of two indicators: the Human Development Index (HDI) and the ecological footprint per person.
In order to achieve sustainability, countries must move towards the bottom right hand corner marked in green and as such decouple human development from natural resource use and environmental impacts.The figure shows that worldwide, no country held that position in 2007.We should also look to avoid the path the arrows take us: higher human wellbeing yet an increase in the ecological footprint followed by a realisation for the need for change, leading to a decrease in the footprint.
Global GDP is projected to grow hugely in coming decades. The OECD projects that it will almost triple in the period 2010–2050. China and India are expected to play a major role in this growthtogether accounting for 46 % of global economic output in 2050, up from less than 13 % today (OECD).
The global middle class is set to expand a lot in the coming decades, increasing from 27 % of the world population of 6.8 billion in 2009 to 58 % of a predicted world population of 8.4 billion in 2030 according to the OECD.The expected developments will clearly have implications for the environment since middle class consumption patterns are typically resource-intensive and heavily contribute to environmental pressures.
Here you can see the projected rise in global material consumption which is much steeper than predicted increases in population.This is a result of the projections for the global economy to continue to grow, despite the economic crisis currently affecting Europe.This again reinforces the impact our use of resources will have on the environment.
Of great importance to today’s theme are the Europe 2020 strategy and the 7th EAP.The Europe 2020 strategy provides the overarching EU perspective on smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Increasing resource efficiency features prominently in the strategy as one of seven flagship initiatives. It aims at a shift towards a resource-efficient, low-carbon economy, recognising the environmental prerequisites for sustainable growth.The 7th Environment Action Programme (EAP) sets the EU’s environmental agenda for the period 2014-2020, addressing a triple (and interrelated) challenge:Protect nature and strengthen ecological resilience;Boost sustainable resource-efficient low-carbon growth; and Effectively address environment-related threats to health. But even more importantly, it provides us with a vision for 2050 in which we live well within the planet’s ecological limits.
Economic activity and human well-being ultimately depend on natural capital and the ecosystem services that it provides. Sustainable development implies that economic growth is achieved within ecological constraints and that the socio-technical systems provide societal needs and value within the ecological limits. To maintain ecosystem resilience we will have to completely change the socio-technical systems in society. Technology improvements are not sufficient, because they are outweighed by the economic growth.
In the EU-15 (AT, BE, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GR, IE, IT, LU, NL, PT, SE, UK), the decoupling of material use from population and economic growth is almost absolute when observed in a 40-year time-frame. The EU-12 countries (BG, CY, CZ, EE, HU, LT, LV, MT, PL, SI, SK, RO) managed to improve material productivity in the 1990s, but then this development levelled off. In both EU-15 and EU-12, you can see that during the recent economic downturn, resource use fell more than GDP. The positive sign is that materials productivity in Europe — GDP generated per tonne of direct material use — has improved. Effectively, our economies are creating more wealth out of the resources that they use.
A ‘circular’ economy means limiting our use of natural resources, and recycling as much of them as possible.
We need to start treating waste as a resource so that we no longer need to drain the earth’s resources for our needs. Europe is still very far from achieving its target of 50 % recycling by 2020.
European environmental policies appear to have had a clearer impact on improving resource efficiency than on maintaining ecosystem resilience. There would be value in considering objectives and targets that explicitly recognise the relationships between resource efficiency, ecosystem resilience and human well-being.
How shall we manage this transitions process?Unfortunately, we know far less about managing systemic change in socio-technical systems than we do about managing incremental change. For this reason, we can only highlight the most promising ways to manage this transition.
The most basic way to manage this transition is the creation of new targets: Europe has already set itself targets for 2020 and for 2030. These targets are mostly aiming at improved efficiency. We also have a vision for 2050, but this vision needs to be fleshed out with concrete new targets for 2050.
At the EEA in the coming years, we will be working most on this second point. We will continue to refine the knowledge base to help inform policy implementation and assess systemic challenges to 2050. We have already been given a role in monitoring and evaluating the 7th EAP, which will be adopted later this month, and our five-year Multi-Annual Work Programme has identified the theme of transitions as a priority area.
At the EEA in the coming years, we will be working most on this second point. We will continue to refine the knowledge base to help inform policy implementation and assess systemic challenges to 2050. We have already been given a role in monitoring and evaluating the 7th EAP, which will be adopted later this month, and our five-year Multi-Annual Work Programme has identified the theme of transitions as a priority area.