Torgeir Ericson, CICERO Norway 9-10 June 2011, Tampere Climate Indicator with Stakeholder Assessments of Future Desired Emission Paths Torgeir Ericson, CICERO Norway 9-10 June 2011, Tampere

Content Norwegian sustainable development indicators 3 reasons for new type of indicators Suggested indicator

18 Norwegian sustainable development indicators International cooperation for sustainable development and combating poverty 1. Norwegian official development assistance, in NOK and as percentage of gross national income 2. Imports from least developed countries and from all developing countries Climate, ozone and long-range air pollution 3. Norwegian emissions of greenhouse gases compared with the Kyoto Protocol target 4. Emissions of NOx, NH3, SO2 and NMVOCs Biodiversity and cultural heritage 5. Bird population index – population trends for breeding bird species in terrestrial ecosystems 6. Proportion of inland water bodies classified as “clearly not at risk” 7. Proportion of coastal waters classified as “clearly not at risk” 8. Trend in standards of maintenance of protected buildings Natural resources 9. Energy use per unit of GDP 10. Size of spawning stock of Northeast Arctic cod and Norwegian spring-spawning herring, compared with the precautionary reference points Hazardous chemicals 11. Irreversible losses of biologically productive areas 12. Potential exposure to hazardous substances Sustainable economic and social development 13. Net national income per capita by sources of income 14. Trends in income distribution 15. Generational accounts: Need to tighten public sector finances as a share of GDP 16. Population by highest level of educational attainment 17. Disability pensioners and long-term unemployed persons as a percentage of the population 18. Life expectancy at birth

Weaknesses of the indicators No assessments on sustainable levels No forward-looking Difficult to understand Little used

Three explanations for this Indicators may be improved by participation, involvement and assessment on future desired development Three explanations for this Scientific data is only information, not knowledge Postnormal science We need projections and normative assessments

a) Scientific data is only information, not knowledge

Typical indicator But, is the development sustainable?

Typical indicator The figure gives an impression that this is the sustainable level

Typical indicator But, for all we know, ”sustainability” could be around here

Typical indicator Or here….

Typical indicator Or here….

Typical indicator

It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure Einstein To create meaning we must have both the “objective” measurements and the “subjective” interpretations/assessments. Without each other an indicator makes no sense and is without meaning.

Indicator with several perspectives on the sustainable level ”Sustainable” level: perspective 1 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 2 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 3 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 4 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 5 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 6 Minner om vanlig høringsrunde …In this case with much disagreements

Indicator with several perspectives on the sustainable level ”Sustainable” level: perspective 1 ”Bærekraftig” nivå: perspektiv 4 ”Bærekraftig” nivå: perspektiv 5 ”Bærekraftig” nivå: perspektiv 2 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 3 …In this case with much agreement

Indicator with several perspectives on the sustainable level ”Sustainable” level: perspective 1 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 2 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 3 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 4 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 5 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 6 …In this case with much disagreements on the exact sustainable level, but still with agreements that the development is not sustainable

Indicator with several perspectives on the sustainable level ”Sustainable” level: perspective 1 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 2 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 3 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 4 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 5 ”Sustainable” level: perspective 6

b) Postnormal science When 'facts are uncertain, values in dispute, stakes high and decisions urgent’ Ravetz & Funtowicz (e.g. climate, biodversity) … decision making is difficult

Can we take this into account in indicators? Involve people Create a shared context/framework Higher degree of understanding of challenges may emerge A larger share may feel ownership to solutions, Popper’s Open Society (1966): when experts cannot predict then a process of decision-making that is as open as possible to knowledge and ideas from all sectors of society is most effective Suggestion: indicate plurality of legitimate perspectives on the issue at hand in the indicator

c) We need projections and normative assessments

Stiglitz report, 2009 (Stiglitz, Sen Fitoussi ) Message 1: Measuring sustainability differs from standard statistical practice in a fundamental way: to do it adequately, we need projections, not only observations. Message 2: Measuring sustainability also entails prior responses to normative questions. In this respect too, it strongly differs from standard statistical activity

Construction of indicator

Conclusion Existing sustainable development indicators tells little of whether the development is sustainable or not Indicators with forward looking assessments may be informative and increase attention and discussions and involvement