Read through the following statements/questions. You should be able to answer all of these after reading through the content on this page. I suggest writing or typing out your answers, but if nothing else, say them out loud to yourself.
Clearly, there are a lot of ways to think about and measure whether or not we are living sustainably, and we've only scratched the surface in this course. So far, we've primarily examined how to be environmentally sustainable. But what about the other two "E's" of sustainability that were discussed in Lesson 1? If you can't remember what they are, I suggest clicking back to Lesson 1 [1] to refresh your memory.
Remember that one of the overarching goals of this course is to address issues from a humanistic perspective, which, among other things, means that we are concerned about the plight of all human life. And the discussion of equity made it clear that access to resources is an essential component of sustainability. Achieving environmental sustainability is a precondition for establishing this - humans live on the earth and need its resources to survive - but if we fail to address the quality of life of the people living on the planet, we've only won a partial victory. What good is a nice planet if all of the people on it are miserable?
If someone gave you a choice between a high or low quality of life, chances are about 100% that you'd say "high." But what actually constitutes a high quality of life?
GDP is the most oft-used metric to indicate how a country's economy is doing. But it is also widely used as a general indicator of how a country's people are doing. There is some usefulness to this, as you will see below. But GDP obscures a lot of possible problems (economic, social, environmental, etc.), and does not indicate all of the good things about a society. In short, there are some things that are good for GDP that are bad for people, and there are some things that are good for people that are not necessarily good for GDP. This problem was eloquently described by Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. It is as relevant today as it was 45 years ago. Hopefully, this will give you some pause when you hear the latest GDP numbers as an indicator of how well a country is doing. Watch his speech below (2:11 minutes)
One of the major inadequacies of GDP as an indicator of how society is doing is the invisibility of household labor, which is primarily done by women. According to the OECD [8], men in the U.S. spend an average of 17.5 hours per week doing unpaid household labor, while women spend (wait for it) 28.4 hours per week! None of this is counted towards GDP. (Related note: If any parent or spouse is a "stay-at-home" mom or dad, please never say that they "don't work." They just don't get paid to work.)
This article [9] from the New York Times provides some interesting visualizations of the gender-based household labor gap across the world, and found that even at minimum wage women across the world would have made 10.9 trillion (!) dollars in 2019 alone. To provide some context, the total global GDP in 2020 was a little under 85 trillion, according to [10] the World Bank. A few other problems with GDP include:
Quality of life is another one of those terms that is thrown around liberally but has no specific definition. We all want a high quality of life, but what does that mean exactly? I am not here to settle the debate, but I do like the definition from this website [14]: Quality of life is "the extent to which people's 'happiness requirements' are met." I'd add the term "satisfaction" in there as well, as in "are people's 'satisfaction' requirements met?" The same site also notes that "[Quality of life] may be defined as subjective well-being." Nothing is universally regarded as necessary for happiness, life satisfaction, or well-being. For example, I have friends who LOVE to hunt for deer and will sit for hours in a tree stand in the freezing cold, silently waiting for one to walk by. I can think of 1,000 things that I'd rather do than that (all numbers approximate). But to them, that is an important part of their quality of life. Nothing wrong at all with that, by the way - it's just not for me.
Hunting is something that is obviously not universally required for a high quality of life. But I'm sure there are thousands, if not millions, of people who count it as important. But if you think about it, there is nothing that everybody loves to do, so it wouldn't matter which activity I used as an example. So, if we want to measure the quality of life, how do we do it?
Let's go through a quick thought experiment.
Please click on this link to fill out a short questionnaire. The answers are anonymous.
We have used the word "development" solely with respect to "sustainable development" so far, though Herman Daly addressed development to some degree. The word development is used a LOT in economics, politics, and particularly in international studies. "Development Studies" is considered its own discipline and many schools offer Development Studies degrees [18].
But how do we know if a society or country is "developed?" Or better yet, how can we compare how well "developed" one country is relative to another? You probably have heard the term "undeveloped countries" or "underdeveloped countries" used in political or economic discourse. But have you ever stopped to think what that actually means? Clearly being "undeveloped" is a bad thing, so by using that term judgment is being passed. Most commonly, it is indicative of the relative income of a country and whether or not they've embraced the modern economic system. But as RFK pointed out (and as I'm sure your surveys will attest) income is not the only thing required to make life worth living.
The World Bank [19] is an international organization whose stated goals [20] are to 1) "End extreme poverty" and 2) "Promote shared prosperity." Historically, they have done this primarily by offering loans to governments and organizations.
The World Bank figures very prominently in global economics, but their reputation is mixed, especially among sustainable development advocates. They have a tendency to provide loans with conditions that push economies in the direction they want them to go, sometimes at the expense of the people in that country. That said, they have a lot of expertise, and are a good place for economic and other data. The document below provides a good explanation of what development is and is not. Frankly, it is surprising to see such a document from the World Bank, given their historical focus on economic growth alone. But they bring up some very good points. (Note that I summarize the key points below.)
A few important points from this reading:
It should be clear by now that there are many possible factors that contribute to quality of life, or lack thereof. Back to our original question: How do we measure quality of life? For that, we need a quality of life metric. These are often referred to as development indices. Recall from Lesson 1 that it is important to be able to measure aspects of sustainability? Development indices are one aspect of this.
There are two approaches to this:
There have been many attempts to do the latter and a few that have tried to do the former. It would be impossible to research all of these, but some of the most-used and/or most useful ones are listed below. The first two (HDI and Inequality-Adjusted HDI) measure things that lead to a high quality of life, the third one (Happiness Index) attempts to measure it directly, and the fourth (Multidimensional Poverty Index) measures things that indicate a lack of quality of life. The last one(Happy Planet Index) - which is optional - is a mixture of the two plus ecological footprint.
Please note that even the best metric cannot create a full picture of development, however it is measured. Even the most "developed" country - regardless of how you define development - will have people who are living in poor conditions. Also keep in mind that this is not a comprehensive list of development indices.
The Human Development Index is the most well-known quality of life metric. It was created by the United Nations (UN), who assesses it every year. It measures three things to determine quality of life, as you will see below: living a "long and healthy life, being knowledgeable, and hav(ing) a decent standard of living." The HDI scale goes from 0 (the worst possible) to 1 (the best possible).
I suggest reading the following short description and browsing the most recent HDI rankings by country.
HDI combines three indicators to evaluate the level of development in a country:
This is intended to provide a fuller picture of human development. They do recognize some inadequacies of HDI, though, as they state: "The HDI simplifies and captures only part of what human development entails. It does not reflect on inequalities, poverty, human security, empowerment, etc." Some of this is addressed in the Inequality-Adjusted HDI, which is addressed below.
The UN also publishes Inequality-Adjusted HDI (IHDI), which takes HDI and discounts it according to how equally the individual development metrics are spread across the population. If the Inequality-Adjusted HDI is lower than a country's HDI, then there is some inequality. For example, let's say two countries both have an average life expectancy of 74 years, which means life expectancy would be the same in the HDI rankings. But if in country A the wealthy people are living much longer than the low-income folks, and in country B pretty much everyone has the same average lifespan regardless of wealth, country B would be higher on the Inequality-Adjusted HDI rankings.
The Inequality-Adjusted HDI also uses a scale of 0 to 1, with 1 being the highest. Note that all countries have some inequality, so all IHDI scores are at least a little bit lower than the HDI score for that country.
As noted by the UN, the IHDI represents "the loss to human development due to inequality." The more inequality, the more the HDI score drops when adjusted for inequality. Note that the pattern in the map below is similar to the HDI map above, but the raw values are a little bit lower.
The short reading below from the UN provides a description of IHDI.
The Sustainable Development Solutions Network [28], an organization with esteemed members from throughout the world, has published the World Happiness Report since 2012 (the 2023 version of the World Happiness Report is available [29]). This reporting effort is led in part by renowned International Development expert Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University.
The World Happiness Report asks people to indicate on a scale of 0 - 10 their quality of life now and their expected quality of life in the future (see World Happiness Report details here [30], if you'd like). The basic premise behind this is that if you would like to determine how happy or satisfied someone is with their life, just ask them. This is a type of self-reported quality of life and results in a score of 0 - 10. This is sometimes referred to as the Happiness Index.
Pretty simple, right? Though it does beg some important questions. For example, if someone lives a short life with little education, but they are happy, does it matter? What about someone that has very little freedom, but is happy? What if they have almost no money, but are happy? What if others in their country lead much "better" lives, but they do not know it? I do not have the answers, but they are important questions to think about.
You may want to read the following as well.
A few things worth noting from the first reading:
The Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) is another UN metric. The premise of the MPI based on the recognition that (lack of) income is not the only way to measure poverty. For example, if a family is above the income-based poverty level but does not have access to adequate health care or education, they are stilll "poor" in quality of life terms.
The United Nations Development Programme(UNDP) summarizes the MPI [34]thusly: "The MPI looks beyond income to understand how people experience poverty in multiple and simultaneous ways. It identifies how people are being left behind across three key dimensions: health, education and standard of living, comprising 10 indicators. People who experience deprivation in at least one third of these weighted indicators fall into the category of multidimensionally poor."
As you can see below, the MPI provides a weighted list of measurable indicators. If someone experiences at least one third (1/3) of these factors, they are considered "multidimensionally poor." For example, if a family has a child that died in the last five years(1/6 weight) and one child does not attend school up to class eight (1/6 weight), they would be multidimensionally poor (1/6 + 1/6 = 1/3). But if someone was undernourished (1/6) and they don't have electricity (1/18) and cook with wood (1/18) they would not be considered multidimensionally poor (1/6 + 1/18 + 1/18 = less than 1/3). You may be thinking that it is pretty callous to consider undernourishment alone as not enough to be poor. To be fair to the UN, they spend a lot of time helping undernourished people. (As you may remember, "zero hunger [35]" is one of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals.) Just because they are not "multidimensionally" poor does not mean that they are not considered worthy of assistance! It is merely an imperfect but helpful attempt to identify the most underserved populations in the world.
The reading below from the UNDP outlines findings from a recent report on MPI.
The Happy Planet index takes into account both well-being (they use the same metric as the Happiness Index), life expectancy (like the HDI), and inequality of outcomes. The higher your well-being and life expectancy, the higher your score. Inequality is expressed as a percentage, with a higher percentage meaning more equal outcomes. But what is unique about the Happy Planet Index is that it divides by the ecological footprint, so a higher ecological footprint will result in a lower score, and vice-versa. Nic Marks created this index. He describes it in the short (1:54) video below.
Read about the Happy Planet Index [38] here, including how it is calculated and its limitations. You may want to browse the data here [39]. You are welcome, but not required, to watch the TED talk.
Now that you have completed the content, I suggest going through the Learning Objectives Self-Check list at the top of the page.
Links
[1] https://www.e-education.psu.edu/emsc240/node/508
[2] https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd0MpGT4S9Ucfq06T-z57N6sxu3lag6AR525O37lCxH9bV8sA/viewform?usp=sf_link
[3] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FWh9RjFvswYxtOy5ZH1ntNxnjsRPH3QihlFYsZS2Ehk/edit#gid=34579145
[4] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OrpMvH0gLMeJSWnKpBY7JXUOJpjqemsn85l0EDkEJM0/edit#gid=1755842469
[5] http://www.glaserprogress.org/
[6] https://www.youtube.com/user/colinatpyramid
[7] https://www.youtube.com/embed/77IdKFqXbUY
[8] https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/10/heres-what-women-could-earn-if-household-chores-were-compensated.html
[9] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/04/opinion/women-unpaid-labor.html
[10] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD
[11] https://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2018/8/speed-ded-regner-stockholm-world-water-week
[12] https://pixabay.com/photos/water-water-winner-women-africa-3936378/
[13] https://pixabay.com/service/license/
[14] http://www.gdrc.org/uem/qol-define.html
[15] https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScFotLrE7CPnuKIVs9k9ldLEA-ipwUEvCHE8VQg59OTxn1lqw/viewform?usp=sf_link
[16] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GnuGm0vZ1IXRN35XsvxLV3Cf1PrYblM3dW99HE--qbE/edit?usp=sharing
[17] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/101BttqgN_hPYUVBN5C2xODhPtvLZWDpl3dtKliav8uw/edit?resourcekey#gid=1941954160
[18] https://www.google.com/search?espv=2&q=development+studies+degree&oq=development+studies+degree&gs_l=serp.3..0i67j0l3j0i22i30l6.52650.54317.0.54502.9.8.1.0.0.0.210.720.5j1j1.7.0....0...1.1.64.serp..1.8.720.q-LI9Y-uprQ
[19] http://www.worldbank.org/
[20] http://www.worldbank.org/en/about/what-we-do
[21] https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/454041468780615049/pdf/2489402nd0edition0Beyond0economic0growth.pdf
[22] http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi
[23] https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2020
[24] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:JackintheBox
[25] http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/inequality-adjusted-human-development-index-ihdi
[26] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2020_Inequality-Adjusted_Human_Development_Index_Map.png
[27] http://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2020
[28] http://unsdsn.org/
[29] https://worldhappiness.report/
[30] http://www.gallup.com/poll/122453/understanding-gallup-uses-cantril-scale.aspx
[31] https://worldhappiness.report/news/its-a-three-peat-finland-keeps-top-spot-as-happiest-country-in-world/
[32] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/03/these-are-the-happiest-countries-in-the-world/
[33] https://happiness-report.s3.amazonaws.com/2022/WHR+22.pdf
[34] http://hdr.undp.org/en/2020-MPI
[35] https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal2
[36] https://www.youtube.com/c/theneweconomics
[37] https://www.youtube.com/embed/sZPYI8BfnBs
[38] https://happyplanetindex.org/learn-about-happy-planet-index/
[39] https://happyplanetindex.org/countries/