Living in the ‘doughnut’: Reconsidering the boundaries via composite indicators

IF 7 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Ecological Indicators Pub Date : 2024-11-24 DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112864
Gianluca Gucciardi , Tommaso Luzzati
{"title":"Living in the ‘doughnut’: Reconsidering the boundaries via composite indicators","authors":"Gianluca Gucciardi ,&nbsp;Tommaso Luzzati","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112864","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The concept of planetary boundaries (Rockström et al., 2009) and the need for social minima were integrated by Raworth (2012, 2017) into a ’doughnut-shaped’ framework, representing a ’safe and just space’ for humanity. Empirical assessments have revealed that no country currently falls within this ’doughnut’. However, to what extent do the results depend on the methodological assumptions, and could a less stringent metric, allowing trade-offs between indicators, improve these outcomes? Preserving the core of Raworth’s theoretical framework, we address these questions by constructing two separate sets of composite indicators for the social and environmental dimensions. Following an uncertainty-based approach, we obtain the two sets by combining alternative normalisation, weighting, and aggregation techniques. This approach yields a new, easily communicable, and robust metric for the ‘safe and just space’. Our analysis strengthens previous findings, showing that even with less stringent criteria, no country currently falls within the doughnut, underscoring the substantial gap to be addressed in both social and environmental policies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11459,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Indicators","volume":"169 ","pages":"Article 112864"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X24013219","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The concept of planetary boundaries (Rockström et al., 2009) and the need for social minima were integrated by Raworth (2012, 2017) into a ’doughnut-shaped’ framework, representing a ’safe and just space’ for humanity. Empirical assessments have revealed that no country currently falls within this ’doughnut’. However, to what extent do the results depend on the methodological assumptions, and could a less stringent metric, allowing trade-offs between indicators, improve these outcomes? Preserving the core of Raworth’s theoretical framework, we address these questions by constructing two separate sets of composite indicators for the social and environmental dimensions. Following an uncertainty-based approach, we obtain the two sets by combining alternative normalisation, weighting, and aggregation techniques. This approach yields a new, easily communicable, and robust metric for the ‘safe and just space’. Our analysis strengthens previous findings, showing that even with less stringent criteria, no country currently falls within the doughnut, underscoring the substantial gap to be addressed in both social and environmental policies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生活在 "甜甜圈 "中:通过综合指标重新考虑界限
行星边界的概念(Rockström 等人,2009 年)和对社会最小值的需求被 Raworth(2012 年,2017 年)纳入一个 "甜甜圈 "框架,代表了人类的 "安全和公正空间"。经验评估显示,目前没有一个国家属于这个 "甜甜圈"。然而,这些结果在多大程度上取决于方法假设,而一个不那么严格的衡量标准,允许指标之间的权衡,能否改善这些结果?在保留 Raworth 理论框架核心的基础上,我们通过构建两套独立的社会和环境综合指标来解决这些问题。按照一种基于不确定性的方法,我们通过结合不同的归一化、加权和汇总技术来获得这两套指标。这种方法为 "安全和公正空间 "提供了一种新的、易于传播且稳健的衡量标准。我们的分析加强了之前的研究结果,表明即使采用不那么严格的标准,目前也没有一个国家属于 "甜甜圈 "范围之内,这突出表明在社会和环境政策方面存在巨大差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ecological Indicators
Ecological Indicators 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
1163
审稿时长
78 days
期刊介绍: The ultimate aim of Ecological Indicators is to integrate the monitoring and assessment of ecological and environmental indicators with management practices. The journal provides a forum for the discussion of the applied scientific development and review of traditional indicator approaches as well as for theoretical, modelling and quantitative applications such as index development. Research into the following areas will be published. • All aspects of ecological and environmental indicators and indices. • New indicators, and new approaches and methods for indicator development, testing and use. • Development and modelling of indices, e.g. application of indicator suites across multiple scales and resources. • Analysis and research of resource, system- and scale-specific indicators. • Methods for integration of social and other valuation metrics for the production of scientifically rigorous and politically-relevant assessments using indicator-based monitoring and assessment programs. • How research indicators can be transformed into direct application for management purposes. • Broader assessment objectives and methods, e.g. biodiversity, biological integrity, and sustainability, through the use of indicators. • Resource-specific indicators such as landscape, agroecosystems, forests, wetlands, etc.
期刊最新文献
A review of interactions between irrigation and evapotranspiration Hydrological dynamics and its impact on wetland ecological functions in the Sanjiang Plain, China Integrating spatial relationships in the DEA approach for ecological efficiency evaluation: A case study of the Chaohu watershed Cumulative effects of climate change and land use on the ecological status of Scandinavian lakes show contrasted interactions in different ecoregions: the role of pre-disturbance conditions in assessing ecological status Construction of prediction model for water retention of forest ecosystem in alpine region based on vegetation spectral features
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1