Sustainability Performance Indicators, SPI
A Sustainability Performance Indicator (SPI) can be used to condense the large amount of environmental, economic and social information that many companies obtain down into a small number of key indicators. SPIs can be grouped according to the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainability (the latter will be dealt with separately). and can be used by companies to measure their sustainability performance and guide decisions regarding further progress.
Economic performance indicators encompass all aspects of an organisation’s economic interactions and focus on how the economic status of the stakeholders changes as a consequence of the organisation’s activities. Examples of these types of indicators include company turnover, profit, and the amount of products sold can be used. Economic accounting and reporting is well established and the data required for using economic performance indicators can be retrieved from a company’s financial department.
Social performance indicators are concerned with an organisation’s impact on the social systems it operates within. These would include labour practices, human rights and broader issues affecting consumers, the community and other stakeholders in society. Data for calculating social performance indicators may be retrieved from, among others sources, human resource and safety and occupational health departments.
.
Strengths and weaknesses
.
How you can take action
Sustainability performance indicators can help in monitoring the overall activities of a company. Assessing the data these indicators yield over time can reveal to what extent the company’s economic and social performance is sustainable. SPIs can also be used to assess the sustainability of CSOs themselves. Given that many small and medium sized enterprises lack the awareness, time and resources required to implement sustainability performance measurements, CSOs could provide support and guidance on their usage. SPIs are also an effective tool for campaigning and can be used by CSOs as the basis from which to encourage companies to improve their policies. CSOs are in a strong position to get involved with political developments by lobbying for laws and regulations that call for coherent indicators and reporting standards. Monitoring using SPIs provides an additional channel for networking with businesses and other CSOs.
.
Case study: The Global Reporting Initiative
One of the most successful applications of a SPI is the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), which pioneered the world’s most widely used sustainability reporting framework. The GRI framework sets out the principles and indicators that organisations can use to measure and report their economic, environmental, and social performance. Started in 1997 by the non-profit CERES, the GRI quickly gained both support, from international organisations such as UNEP and Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), and acceptance from companies around the world. The number of organisations which have released sustainability reports based on these freely available guidelines has increased from 20 in 1999 to over 850 in 2006. Sustainability reports based on the GRI framework can be used to benchmark organisational performance with respect to laws, norms, codes, performance standards and voluntary initiatives; demonstrate organisational commitment to sustainable development; and compare organisational performance over time.
.
Learn more and get inspired
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)
.
You can download the whole paper on indicators “Measuring Performance towards Sustainable Consumption and Production – Types of Indicators and Indicator Sets” and other interesting papers of the Action Town project in the Library!
TMR/TMC (Total material requirement/consumption)
TMC (Total Material Consumption) measures the total mass (in tonnes) of materials (fossil fuels, metals, minerals, and biomass) that are consumed by the domestic economic system. In comparison, TMR (Total Material Requirement) includes the primary materials which are used for the production of goods exported into other countries. TMC and TMR include the so-called “direct” flows which are used in the economic system as well as the “indirect” flows. The latter refers to materials which have been used along the whole production chain of imported products.
Figure: Recource use in European countries (Source: Moll and Bringezu, 2005)
In addition, TMC/TMR comprise not only those raw materials that are extracted or (in the case of agricultural products) harvested from the domestic environment and used in subsequent economic processing (e.g. fossil fuels, metals, biomass from agriculture, forestry, etc) but also those primary materials which are not further used in economic processing and hence are not valued economically (also called ‘domestic hidden flows’). This means that TMC and TMR account for both used and unused materials that have been required to produce a good which is domestically consumed or exported, often referred to as ‘ecological rucksacks’ of these products. The graph illustrates the relationship between TMC and TMR for the EU-15[i].
Two basic approaches can be used to calculate TMC/TMR: (a) economy-wide material flow accounting (EW-MFA)[ii], or (b) input-output (IO) calculation (see the assessment tool guidelines for further information on MFA and IO). So far, TMC/TMR have been derived only via the EW-MFA approach (a). The underlying concept and framework is provided by Eurostat[iii] and recently also by OECD[iv].
.
Strengths and weaknesses
.
How you can take action
Our population and per-capita consumption of the planet’s natural resources are increasing rapidly. Despite how long this has been known and the fact that in the climate area there are signs of real policy responses, it is remarkable how little is happening in other areas. In terms of resource consumption, one of the major problems remains the lack of strong drivers for improvement. What is beginning to occur in the field of climate change (driven by measurements and emission targets) is yet to happen in the field of resource use. While climate benefits are now often assessed, resource use benefits (or costs) are not.
TMC/TMR data enable CSOs to realise what has been called for previously in the “Brundtland Report”, that “those making [...] policy decisions must be responsible for the impact of those decisions upon the environmental resource capital of their nations”. With regard to the strategies identified at the beginning of the guidelines, TMC/TMR help CSOs to quantify worldwide and national resource use and to directly address the issue of ecological limits. Indicators can be used at the consumer level – for instance to assist campaigning for a reduction of the personal use of natural resources – as well as at the national or European level. Here, TMR could be used to lobby for underlining the importance of a European approach to global resource use and setting a global example. If the EU measures its resource use and sets targets to reduce it, this will create a driver for better policies worldwide.
.
Case study: “Tracking Europe’s Natural Resource Consumption”
This initiative, started in 2006 by academic and consulting institutions, measures material use by applying materialflow analysis (MFA) and TMR indicators and underscores the importance of standardising basic data on material flows at the national level. The initiative, led by the Sustainable Europe Research Institute (SERI), includes the Global Footprint Network, the Best Food Forward, the Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy and a number of other civil society organisations (see www.materialflow-consensus.net). Supporters of the initiative encourage government agencies to place materialflow analysis at the core of their natural resource use research and policy analysis, recognising its vital role in sustainability policy, research and communication. A robust and well documented statistical basis on material flows is essential for many core areas of sustainability science (e.g. carbon and greenhouse gas accounting, Ecological Footprinting, calculations of Environmental Space and assessments on the product level). Such a joint database for resource use indicator calculations should be as transparent and freely accessible as possible.
.
Learn more and get inspired
www.materialflow-consensus.net
Eurostat – Environmental accounts
[i] Moll, S., S. Bringezu, et al. (2005). Resource use in European countries. An estimate of materials and waste streams in the Community including imports and exports using the instrument of material flow analysis., Wuppertal Institut.
[ii] EUROSTAT (2001). Economy-wide material flow accounts and derived indicators. A methodological guide. Luxembourg, Statistical Office of the European Union.
[iii] EUROSTAT (2001). Economy-wide material flow accounts and derived indicators. A methodological guide. Luxembourg, Statistical Office of the European Union.
[iv] OECD (2007). Measuring Material Flows and Resource Productivity. The OECD guide. Paris, Environment Directorate. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
.
You can download the whole paper on indicators “Measuring Performance towards Sustainable Consumption and Production – Types of Indicators and Indicator Sets” and other interesting papers of the Action Town project in the Library!
Ecological footprint (EF)
The Ecological Footprint has proven to be one of the most successful indicators for communicating the concept of environmental sustainability and the physical limits of our planet. The basic concept was developed by Mathis Wackernagel and William Rees in the early 1990s. The EF measures how much biologically productive land is required to provide the resources consumed, and absorb the wastes generated, by a population for a certain period of time (in most cases one year). It takes into account available technology, resource management conditions and both land and water surfaces.
In order to calculate an EF, human consumption is divided into different categories (food, living, transport, etc.) and then converted into land use. The annual production of biologically provided resources, called biocapacity, is also measured as part of the EF concept. The resource and regeneration capacity of our planet can not be adequately calculated in monetary terms as climate stability and soil fertility for instance are not reflected in market prices. Biophysical units, rather than money, are therefore used to measure the human consumption of materials, energy and land area. The standard unit of measurement used is a global hectare, which equates to one hectare of global average bioproductivity (Global average bioproductivity per hectare = (total bioproductivity of the Earth’s bioproductive land and water) / (total number of hectares of bioproductive land and water)). Humanity’s Ecological Footprint can also be expressed in terms of the “number of planet Earths” theoretically required to support human resource use and waste generation.
Comparing Ecological Footprints with the real ecological capacity of the Earth allows assessments of whether, and by how much, humankind is overusing natural systems. If the EF of the residents within a region exceeds its biocapacity, the region is said to be in ecological deficit. Such a deficit at the global level is called ecological overshoot. In 2008 for instance, the so-called “World Overshoot Day” was reached on October 6th. This date signified the point at which humankind’s consumption of natural resources in 2008 matched those provided by ecosystems for the entire year. Consequently, from that day forward resources which could not be reproduced in the same year were used, leading to a reduction in the planet’s biocapacity.
.
Strengths and weaknesses
.
How you can take action
The Global Footprint Network, founded by the “inventor” of the Ecological Footprint, Mathis Wackernagel, in 2003, is an association of researchers and activists concerned with making the Ecological Footprint indicator popular as a measure for ecological sustainability, promoting its application and refining the method. The large network consists of more than 80 government, academic, corporate and CSO partners spanning six continents. Since 2003, it has made significant progress towards achieving its goals , namely by establishing the indicator as a basis for political decision-making. A key activity of the Global Footprint Network is the ‘Ten in Ten Campaign,’ which seeks to implement the Ecological Footprint at the national level in ten countries by 2015. To date, National Ecological Footprint Accounts have been calculated for more than 150 countries.
The Global Footprint Network has gone to great effort to establish long-lasting collaborations with CSOs and other organisations to collect data and improve data sources and the methodology of the Footprint concept. Partnerships with CSOs are essential in order to ensure a transparent and high-quality indicator. Taking part in such research discussions is beneficial for CSOs as the further development of the EF can be modified to their specific needs. CSOs can use the Ecological Footprint to measure and improve global sustainability, raise awareness and campaign for equitable global resource distribution. Many of the world’s largest environmental organisations are already using the EF concept, including the European Environment Agency (EEA), the Finish Ministry of Environment, the nation of Wales, and large CSO’s like NRG4SD (with 50 regional government participants), ICLEI (with 650 local government members worldwide), and WWF[i].
.
Case study: The Living Planet Report
This report is published biannually by WWF and aims to document the continued disappearance of nature on our planet. It is the only existing report that draws comprehensive worldwide comparisons of countries’ resource consumption. The first LPR devoted to the analysis of worldwide environmental developments was published in 1998. Since 2000, WWF has used not only the Living Planet Index but also the Ecological Footprint as a sustainability indicator. LPRs have been published in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, and 2008[ii], calculating the Footprint of all countries with more than 1 million inhabitants. Since 2004, the Global Footprint Network has served as an official partner of WWF. Using the Ecological Footprint developed by the Global Footprint Network, it is possible to analyse the Footprints of all world regions in a consistent and comparable way. This offers significant advantages for WWF in terms of communicating issues of global resource distribution and fairness[iii] as highlighted in figure 3 below.
Figure: National Footprints as a proportion of the global Footprint[iv]
.
[i] Giljum, S., M. Hammer, et al. (2007). Scientific assessment and evaluation of the indicator “Ecological Footprint“. Final project report. Dessau, German Federal Environment Agency.
[ii] WWF (2008). Living Planet Report 2008. Gland, Switzerland, World Wildlife Fund.
[iii] Giljum, S., M. Hammer, et al. (2007). Scientific assessment and evaluation of the indicator “Ecological Footprint“. Final project report. Dessau, German Federal Environment Agency.
[iv] WWF (2008). Living Planet Report 2008. Gland, Switzerland, World Wildlife Fund.
.
You can download the whole paper on indicators “Measuring Performance towards Sustainable Consumption and Production – Types of Indicators and Indicator Sets” and other interesting papers of the Action Town project in the Library!
Labels and standards based on conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO)
Numerous enterprises and CSOs worldwide apply labels and standards based on the conventions of the International Labour Organisation – e.g. the Fair Trade label, the Ethical Trading Initiative, the SA8000 standard, the Global Reporting Initiative. These labels and standards focus on key issues such as child labour, compensation, discrimination, forced labour, working hours, health and safety, freedom of association and disciplinary practices. Most EU buyers’ social requirements, such as minimum working conditions, are also based on the conventions of international labour standards of the International Labour Organisation (ILO).
ILO conventions and recommendations cover a broad range of 22 subjects including work, employment, social security, social policy and human rights. The international labour standards are made up of 188 conventions and 199 recommendations. Even though most ILO conventions are incorporated into institutional law in western democracies, there is a need to further promote ILO conventions within the globalised economy.
.
Strengths and weaknesses
How you can take action
Labels derived from ILO conventions reflect basic human rights standards and need to be monitored. As the ILO does not have sufficient monitoring capacity, the support of CSOs in assessing companies’ adherence to ILO conventions is crucial. Campaigns can create awareness regarding the implementation and respect of ILO standards and put pressure on national and international policy makers to incorporate them into policies. CSOs have an important role to play in improving and monitoring the standards and may also help in broadening? them – for example by promoting the idea of human wellbeing. To improve labour standards and ensure their quality, CSOs can build inclusive platforms involving politicians, unions, companies and other stakeholders. This can also provide good networking opportunities with scientific institutions and other CSOs.
.
Case study: Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI)
The Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) brings together CSOs, companies and unions to identify and promote best practice in the implementation of codes of conduct, including monitoring and independent verification. Companies such as Anchor Seafood, Body Shop, Chiquita, Levis, NEXT, Marks and Spencer, Safeway Stores, Brooke Bond Tea, Tetley Tea, and Twinings are members of the initiative.
The ETI has developed a multi-sectoral Base Code based on ILO standards. ETI member companies agree to adopt or incorporate the Base Code and must require that their suppliers meet the provisions of the Code within a reasonable timeframe. ETI members are currently participating in four pilot projects, testing various models of code verification. Further details of the initiative can be found at www.ethicaltrade.org.
.
Learn more and get inspired
Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International
.
You can download the whole paper on indicators “Measuring Performance towards Sustainable Consumption and Production – Types of Indicators and Indicator Sets” and other interesting papers of the Action Town project in the Library!
.
Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ)
Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ) is a tool for assessing psychosocial working conditions, health and wellbeing. The tool can be used free of charge by all interested enterprises and organisations and is available in three versions: 1) a long version for research use (141 questions and 30 dimensions), 2) a medium length version for use by environmental professionals (95 questions and 26 dimensions), and 3) a short version to be used by workplaces (44 questions and 8 dimensions).
The questionnaire was developed by the Psychosocial Department of the National Institute of Occupational Health, Copenhagen, Denmark. The COPSOQ aims to improve and facilitate workplace evaluations making national and international comparisons possible. In many European countries, the COPSOQ concept has been applied successfully by a diverse range of enterprises, public services and CSOs. It is used to improve communication between researchers, environmental professionals and workplaces and to make workplaces more attractive, sustainable and viable.
This concept appears to have not yet resonated strongly within the field of sustainable consumption and production but shows significant promise in terms of going beyond minimal labour conditions towards a well-being based approach.
.
Strengths and weaknesses:
.
How you can take action:
The Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire can be used by CSOs to assess the psychosocial indicators in their own organisation. CSOs can support or initiate campaigns that encourage the inclusion of the COPSOQ into the management practices of enterprises and advocate that stakeholders of the SCP community use this tool. CSOs can also take part in further investigating best practice examples of the psychosocial questionnaire in use. Finally, the COPSOQ provides opportunities to network with scientific institutions and other CSOs.
.
Case study:
There is no specific successful case documented yet in the field of SCP but several interesting surveys have been published. Recently, the city of Stuttgart conducted a survey to assess the psychosocial stresses and strains in the city’s administration. All employees throughout all departments were interviewed. www.stuttgart.de/item/show/273273/1/9/360983
.
Learn more and get inspired:
.
You can download the whole paper on indicators “Measuring Performance towards Sustainable Consumption and Production – Types of Indicators and Indicator Sets” and other interesting papers of the Action Town project in the Library!
.
