5.4.6 The Need for DiscussionAll th

5.4.6 The Need for Discussion
All the proposals made in this section are based on the best scientific evidence available to
this consultant and on his own judgement. They merely represent a basis for discussion with
other scientists so that the final procedures required to tackle these complex problems can be
identified.
5.5 A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR AN INTEGRATED SURVEY
5.5.1 Introduction
Sets of desertification indicators have, until now, mainly consisted of biophysical indicators.
When economic indicators have been included it has been as substitutes for these, e.g. in the
form of agricultural yields, and the grounds for this have been questionable. In the real world
of the drylands, people continually make decisions about how to exploit natural resources to
gain income and how to distribute this. The environment takes third place behind economic
and social considerations, as it does elsewhere. One big difference is that the drylands are
inhabited by some of the poorest people in the world, who have some of the most precarious
livelihoods anywhere. So if we wish to gain a comprehensive picture of human-environment
relationships in the drylands we must look at both the human dimensions and the
environmental dimension, preferably in an integrated way.
95
To do this successfully, economic and social indicators cannot be chosen in isolation, but be
selected within a suitable conceptual framework. Over the last twenty years various
frameworks have been constructed to model sustainable development, and these provide a
good starting point for discussion. This section therefore begins by identifying the strengths
and weaknesses of two established theoretical models of sustainable development. It then
describes a new model which can overcome their weaknesses and provide a conceptual
framework for desertification indicators.
5.5.2 The Political Context
Sustainable development was added to the international political agenda by the report of the
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987), "Our Common Future". This
defined sustainable development as “development which meets the needs of the present
generation without jeopardizing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.
But it did not specify how to achieve such intergenerational equity. It also claimed that
economic growth must continue, in order to alleviate poverty and maintain development. This
would must be a "new form of growth" which did not harm the environment or deplete stocks
of natural resources, but how this was to be achieved was also not explained. Political
considerations were important here: as with desertification, developed countries stressed
better environmental management and developing countries more development. Political
negotiations on sustainable development continue in this ambiguous and largely atheoretical
context, at the most referring to simple models like the DPSIR framework, rather than
scientific models that integrate the economic, social and environmental dimensions of
development.
5.5.3 Ecological Economics Model
One of these models has been proposed by ecological economists. It assumes that the human
economic system is part of the global ecological system, or biosphere, and that economic
sustainability depends on the continued healthy functioning of the biosphere. As economic
growth occurs the economic system expands at the expense of the biosphere and becomes
increasingly subject to the laws governing the biosphere and less subject to market forces.
The resilience of the biosphere, on which human resilience depends, is also undermined.
96
The principal ecological economics condition for sustainability is to keep the scale of the
human economy below a critical threshold, above which it threatens the sustainability of the
biosphere (Daly, 1990). This threshold is represented by the concept of carrying capacity,
defined as "the amount of use that can be exceeded only by impairing an environment’s future
suitability for that use". Just as rangelands have a notional carrying capacity of grazing
animals, so there is also a limit to the number of human beings and their economic activities
which the planet can support.
One popular sustainability index, the Ecological Footprint index, tests for this condition by
comparing the area of land which a country needs to provide all of its consumption and waste
disposal needs (its 'footprint)' with the mean global availability of such land (the biocapacity
ratio).If the index is less than or equal to 1 then development is sustainable (Wackernagel and
Rees, 1996).
The disadvantage of the ecological economics approach for providing an integrated
framework for desertification indicators is that it focuses on physical sustainability, and does
not explain how to integrate this with the social and economic dimensions of development.
Nevertheless, a group of US, Swedish and French scientists has proposed that this can be
partly achieved by linking the Ecological Footprint index to the Human Development Index
(see Section 2.9.2) (Moran et al., 2008).
5.5.4 Environmental Economics Model
Environmental economists, on the other hand, do incorporate the economic and social
dimensions of development in their models. Building on neoclassical welfare economics, they
portray total human welfare as including economic, social and environmental welfare, and
define sustainable development as development that “leads to non-declining human welfare
over time” (Pearce, 1991).
To integrate the economy and the environment, they portray nature as another form of capital.
Conventional 'productive' Capital is now called Man-Made Capital. Human Capital refers to
the stock of human knowledge and skills, health status, educational attainment etc. The
environment comprises a stock of Natural Capital, divided into Resources Capital, i.e. stocks
of natural resources, and Environmental Quality, determined by the quality of land,
97
atmosphere and water sinks, the functioning of global cycles and ecosystems, and human
aesthetic perceptions. In this theory, as development occurs, Natural Capital is depleted and
Human and Man-made Capital accumulate.
Of the various environmental economics conditions for sustainability the one that best
integrates the three dimensions of development is the Very Weak Condition, proposed by the
late David Pearce (1991). This requires no decline in the sum of Natural and Human and
Man-Made Capital. Thus, Natural Capital can decline, as long as the loss is more than offset
by the value of Human and Man-Made Capital accumulated. The condition derives from the
Hartwick-Solow Rule proposed by the Nobel Prize-winning economist Robert Solow (1986).
It is the basis of the Genuine Savings Index.
For the purpose of forming an integrated framework for desertification indicators, the Very
Weak Condition has the advantage of integrating the economic, social and environmental
dimensions of development. Unfortunately, it has one flaw: it aggregates Man-Made Capital
and Human Capital in a single variable. This gives no scope to assess relative changes in
these, and in the intragenerational equity and social welfare which are crucial to the
conventional idea of economic development.
5.5.5 Three Dimensional Welfare Model
One way to overcome the limitations of these two approaches is to use a Three Dimensional
Welfare Model that divides the impact of productive activities on human welfare into three
dimensions: (a) economic, determined by income; (b) social, reflecting the equity of
distribution of income; and (c) environmental, determined by the balance between
environmental benefits and costs (Grainger, 2010).
Environmental welfare is a function of the physical quantity of environmental quality,
mediated by human perceptions. Human beings still receive a large amount of environmental
benefits from the environment, but this is reduced through the costs incurred in our productive
activities. If these costs are not paid when they are incurred an environmental welfare deficit
will accumulate.
98
The condition for sustainable development in this model is that social welfare should
increase, changes in income and environmental welfare are not negative, and there is no
environmental welfare deficit.
A limitation of this model is that natural resources do not constrain production. While
controversial, it removes the problem of accounting for substitution and complex flows of
natural resources between countries with open economies, which are limitations on using the
Very Weak Condition. On the other hand, in this new model the environmental costs
associated with natural resource depletion are fully accounted for, including those which
undermine life-support systems.
This condition is consistent with, and extends, the existing indicators of economic growth and
economic development. If income increases then a society experiences economic growth, and
if there is also a rise in collective social welfare it experiences economic development. As
most societies have achieved economic growth and economic development by not paying all
the associated environmental costs they have accumulated an environmental welfare deficit,
and so have not developed sustainably.
5.6 SELECTING ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL INDICATORS
5.6.1 Principles for Selecting Economic Indicators
If the Three Dimensional Welfare Model provides the conceptual framework for an integrated
set of indicators then economic welfare is represented by income, which can be divided into
four categories:
1. Agricultural
2. Wood-based
3. Non-farm
4. Remittances
The first two categories cover the major land use Pressures. The last two cover other sources
of income that become more important when groups diversify their livelihoods during
droughts (Bradley and Grainger, 2004). If data are plentiful then the income groups
99
themselves can be estimated (Kamanga, 2008). Otherwise yields can be used as proxies for
the resource-based categories.
5.6.2 Pri

Kết quả (Việt) 1:

5.4.6 sự cần thiết cho cuộc thảo luậnTất cả các đề xuất được thực hiện trong phần này được dựa trên tốt nhất bằng chứng khoa học sẵn chotư vấn này và trên bản án riêng của mình. Họ chỉ đơn thuần là đại diện cho một cơ sở cho cuộc thảo luận vớiCác nhà khoa học khác để cuối cùng thủ tục cần thiết để giải quyết những vấn đề phức tạp có thểxác định.5.5 MỘT KHUÔN KHỔ KHÁI NIỆM CHO MỘT CUỘC KHẢO SÁT TÍCH HỢP5.5.1 giới thiệuBộ chỉ số sa mạc hóa có, cho đến nay, chủ yếu bao gồm chỉ số lý sinh.Khi chỉ số kinh tế đã được bao gồm nó đã như là sản phẩm thay thế cho này, ví dụ như trong cácCác hình thức của sản lượng nông nghiệp, và các căn cứ này đã có vấn đề. Trong thế giới thựccủa drylands, người liên tục đưa ra quyết định về làm thế nào để khai thác tài nguyên thiên nhiên đểđạt được thu nhập và làm thế nào để phân phối này. Môi trường mất các vị trí thứ ba sau kinh tếvà xã hội cân nhắc, vì nó ở nơi khác. Một sự khác biệt lớn là drylands lànơi sinh sống của một số những người nghèo nhất trên thế giới, những người có một số nguy hiểm nhấtđời sống bất cứ nơi nào. Vì vậy, nếu chúng ta muốn đạt được một hình ảnh toàn diện của con người-môi trườngmối quan hệ trong drylands chúng ta phải nhìn vào cả hai kích thước của con người và cácKích thước môi trường, tốt hơn trong một cách tích hợp. 95Để làm điều này thành công, chỉ số kinh tế và xã hội không thể được lựa chọn trong sự cô lập, nhưngchọn trong một khuôn khổ khái niệm phù hợp. Trong hai mươi năm qua nhiềukhuôn khổ đã được xây dựng để mô hình phát triển bền vững, và chúng cung cấp mộtđiểm khởi đầu tốt cho cuộc thảo luận. Phần này do đó bắt đầu bằng cách xác định những thế mạnhvà điểm yếu của hai mô hình lý thuyết được thành lập của phát triển bền vững. Nó sau đóMô tả một mô hình mới mà có thể vượt qua điểm yếu của họ và cung cấp một khái niệmCác phụ kiện chỉ số sa mạc hóa.5.5.2 bối cảnh chính trịPhát triển bền vững đã được thêm vào chương trình nghị sự chính trị quốc tế của báo cáo của cácThế giới các ủy ban về môi trường và phát triển (1987), "Của chúng tôi tương lai phổ biến". Điều nàyxác định các phát triển bền vững như là "phát triển đáp ứng nhu cầu hiện tạithế hệ mà không có jeopardizing khả năng của thế hệ tương lai để đáp ứng mình cần".Nhưng nó đã không chỉ định làm thế nào để đạt được như vậy công bằng giữa các thế hệ. Nó cũng tuyên bố rằngtăng trưởng kinh tế phải tiếp tục, để giảm nghèo và duy trì phát triển. Điều nàysẽ phải là một "hình thức mới của sự tăng trưởng" mà đã không gây tổn hại cho môi trường hoặc triệt binh cổ phiếutài nguyên thiên nhiên, nhưng làm thế nào đây là phải đạt được cũng không giải thích. Chính trịcân nhắc được quan trọng ở đây: như với sa mạc hóa, nước nhấn mạnh phát triểntốt hơn quản lý môi trường và các nước đang phát triển phát triển hơn. Chính trịtiếp tục cuộc đàm phán về phát triển bền vững trong mơ hồ và phần lớn atheoreticalbối cảnh, nhất đề cập đến các mô hình đơn giản như khuôn khổ DPSIR, thay vìscientific models that integrate the economic, social and environmental dimensions ofdevelopment.5.5.3 Ecological Economics ModelOne of these models has been proposed by ecological economists. It assumes that the humaneconomic system is part of the global ecological system, or biosphere, and that economicsustainability depends on the continued healthy functioning of the biosphere. As economicgrowth occurs the economic system expands at the expense of the biosphere and becomesincreasingly subject to the laws governing the biosphere and less subject to market forces.The resilience of the biosphere, on which human resilience depends, is also undermined. 96The principal ecological economics condition for sustainability is to keep the scale of thehuman economy below a critical threshold, above which it threatens the sustainability of thebiosphere (Daly, 1990). This threshold is represented by the concept of carrying capacity,defined as "the amount of use that can be exceeded only by impairing an environment’s futuresuitability for that use". Just as rangelands have a notional carrying capacity of grazinganimals, so there is also a limit to the number of human beings and their economic activitieswhich the planet can support.One popular sustainability index, the Ecological Footprint index, tests for this condition bycomparing the area of land which a country needs to provide all of its consumption and wastedisposal needs (its 'footprint)' with the mean global availability of such land (the biocapacity
ratio).If the index is less than or equal to 1 then development is sustainable (Wackernagel and
Rees, 1996).
The disadvantage of the ecological economics approach for providing an integrated
framework for desertification indicators is that it focuses on physical sustainability, and does
not explain how to integrate this with the social and economic dimensions of development.
Nevertheless, a group of US, Swedish and French scientists has proposed that this can be
partly achieved by linking the Ecological Footprint index to the Human Development Index
(see Section 2.9.2) (Moran et al., 2008).
5.5.4 Environmental Economics Model
Environmental economists, on the other hand, do incorporate the economic and social
dimensions of development in their models. Building on neoclassical welfare economics, they
portray total human welfare as including economic, social and environmental welfare, and
define sustainable development as development that “leads to non-declining human welfare
over time” (Pearce, 1991).
To integrate the economy and the environment, they portray nature as another form of capital.
Conventional 'productive' Capital is now called Man-Made Capital. Human Capital refers to
the stock of human knowledge and skills, health status, educational attainment etc. The
environment comprises a stock of Natural Capital, divided into Resources Capital, i.e. stocks
of natural resources, and Environmental Quality, determined by the quality of land,
97
atmosphere and water sinks, the functioning of global cycles and ecosystems, and human
aesthetic perceptions. In this theory, as development occurs, Natural Capital is depleted and
Human and Man-made Capital accumulate.
Of the various environmental economics conditions for sustainability the one that best
integrates the three dimensions of development is the Very Weak Condition, proposed by the
late David Pearce (1991). This requires no decline in the sum of Natural and Human and
Man-Made Capital. Thus, Natural Capital can decline, as long as the loss is more than offset
by the value of Human and Man-Made Capital accumulated. The condition derives from the
Hartwick-Solow Rule proposed by the Nobel Prize-winning economist Robert Solow (1986).
It is the basis of the Genuine Savings Index.
For the purpose of forming an integrated framework for desertification indicators, the Very
Weak Condition has the advantage of integrating the economic, social and environmental
dimensions of development. Unfortunately, it has one flaw: it aggregates Man-Made Capital
and Human Capital in a single variable. This gives no scope to assess relative changes in
these, and in the intragenerational equity and social welfare which are crucial to the
conventional idea of economic development.
5.5.5 Three Dimensional Welfare Model
One way to overcome the limitations of these two approaches is to use a Three Dimensional
Welfare Model that divides the impact of productive activities on human welfare into three
dimensions: (a) economic, determined by income; (b) social, reflecting the equity of
distribution of income; and (c) environmental, determined by the balance between
environmental benefits and costs (Grainger, 2010).
Environmental welfare is a function of the physical quantity of environmental quality,
mediated by human perceptions. Human beings still receive a large amount of environmental
benefits from the environment, but this is reduced through the costs incurred in our productive
activities. If these costs are not paid when they are incurred an environmental welfare deficit
will accumulate.
98
The condition for sustainable development in this model is that social welfare should
increase, changes in income and environmental welfare are not negative, and there is no
environmental welfare deficit.
A limitation of this model is that natural resources do not constrain production. While
controversial, it removes the problem of accounting for substitution and complex flows of
natural resources between countries with open economies, which are limitations on using the
Very Weak Condition. On the other hand, in this new model the environmental costs
associated with natural resource depletion are fully accounted for, including those which
undermine life-support systems.
This condition is consistent with, and extends, the existing indicators of economic growth and
economic development. If income increases then a society experiences economic growth, and
if there is also a rise in collective social welfare it experiences economic development. As
most societies have achieved economic growth and economic development by not paying all
the associated environmental costs they have accumulated an environmental welfare deficit,
and so have not developed sustainably.
5.6 SELECTING ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL INDICATORS
5.6.1 Principles for Selecting Economic Indicators
If the Three Dimensional Welfare Model provides the conceptual framework for an integrated
set of indicators then economic welfare is represented by income, which can be divided into
four categories:
1. Agricultural
2. Wood-based
3. Non-farm
4. Remittances
The first two categories cover the major land use Pressures. The last two cover other sources
of income that become more important when groups diversify their livelihoods during
droughts (Bradley and Grainger, 2004). If data are plentiful then the income groups
99
themselves can be estimated (Kamanga, 2008). Otherwise yields can be used as proxies for
the resource-based categories.
5.6.2 Pri