Beyond GDP’ Indicators: Changing the Economic Narrative for a Post-Consumer Society?

Hayden, A., Wilson, J., 2017. “‘Beyond GDP’ Indicators: Changing the Economic Narrative for a Post-Consumer Society?.” In Cohen, M., Brown, H., Vergragt, P. (Eds), Social Change and the Coming of the Post-Consumer Society, Routledge, New York. 

Challenging the Dominant Economic Narrative Through Alternative Wellbeing Indicators: The Canadian Experience.

Hayden, A., Wilson, J., 2017. “Challenging the Dominant Economic Narrative Through Alternative Wellbeing Indicators: The Canadian Experience.” In Bache, I., Scott, K. (Eds). Wellbeing in Politics and Policy, Palgrave MacMillan, London.

Is It What You Measure That Really Matters? The Struggle to Move beyond GDP in Canada

Anders Hayden,  Jeffrey Wilson., 2016, Sustainability 2016, 8, 623

Abstract:

 In light of Gross Domestic Product’s (GDP) well-known limitations as a wellbeing indicator,many alternative measures have been developed around the world. Some advocates of “beyond GDP measures argue that they are key to shifting societal priorities away from economic growth toward sustainability, equity, and well-being. Is there any evidence to date that alternative indicators have lived up to their supporters’ expectations, whether the hope is for a radical transformation of social priorities away from GDP growth or a reformist vision of better policymaking without challenging the growth paradigm? What are the obstacles to fulfilling those expectations? This article examines the Canadian experience, drawing on interviews with researchers, non-governmental organization (NGO) leaders, public-sector officials, and politicians, along with analysis of relevant documents. The hopes of Canadian proponents of new wellbeing measures have been largely disappointed to date, as no impact on federal or provincial policy is evident. Obstacles facing both a transformative and more limited reformist vision are examined. The Canadian case also suggests that use of new socio-economic indicators is best seen as one product of political efforts to bring ecological and social values into decision-making, rather than as the transformative force that will cause a change insocietal priorities.

Measuring environmental impact at the neighbourhood level

Jeffrey Wilson , Peter Tyedmers & Jill Grant (2013): Measuring environmental impact at the neighbourhood level, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 56:1,42-60

Abstract:

We propose that community assessments of environmental impact are increasingly more relevant to planners and policy makers when reported at finer scales of analysis. Using the Town of Oakville, Ontario, as an example, we calculate neighbourhood level ecological footprint values for 241 neighbourhoods. Ecological footprint results range from 5.4 global hectares per capita to 15.2 global hectares per capita, with an average ecological footprint for Oakville of 9.0 global hectares per capita. Our results highlight variability in energy and material flows within a community, providing planners and policy makers detailed information to prioritise programme delivery, allocate limited resources, and support policy development. The lower range of neighbourhood ecological footprint values suggests a potential footprint floor for Oakville of around 5 hectares per capita. The notion of a footprint floor has implications for setting community footprint targets and understanding the magnitude of change neededfor significant ecological footprint reductions.

Province of Ontario: ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT AND BIOCAPACITY ANALYSIS

Stechbart., M,  Wilson., J,  Anielski Management., 2010   Global Footprint Network, Oakland, California, United States of America.

Abstract:

The Ecological Footprint is a tool that assesses humanity’s demand for natural resources and informs us whether our collective consumption levels are approaching or exceeding the Earth’s ecological limits. The Footprint can be directly compared to biocapacity, a metric that accounts for available resource supply using an anthropocentric lens, considering specific products provided by ecosystems for human use (food, fibre, timber and carbon storage). These two measures, taken together, provide a partial ecological balance sheet for the world. 

Calculating ecological footprints at the municipal level: what is a reasonable approach for Canada?

Wilson, J. and Grant, J. L.(2009) 'Calculating ecological footprints at the municipal level: what is a reasonable approach for Canada?', Local Environment, 14: 10, 963 — 979

Abstract:

No clear ecological footprint calculation strategy is available for small- and mid-sized communities within Canada. By adjusting provincial or national footprint findings using data sets available in the public domain, we develop and test a calculation strategy to estimate municipal ecological footprints. Because the calculation approach is consistent with the Global Footprint Network standardised methodology, it permits meaningful comparisons between communities and with global and national footprint estimates. It offers planners, policy-makers, and community leaders an accessible, straight forward, and cost effective strategy for estimating the ecological footprint at the community and municipal level. The suggested approach is best suited for using the ecological footprint as an awareness and education tool. The large number of limitations associated with calculating the municipal approach and limitations associated with calculating ecological footprints in general at the local level make it an unsuitable tool to inform community planning and policy development.

ENSURING THAT DEVELOPMENT METRICS CONSIDER ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY - A PROPOSAL TO COMBINE DEVELOPMENT METRICS WITH AN ECOLOGICAL THRESHOLD VARIABLE

Wilson, Pelot.,  Tyedmers 2008. Ensuring that Development Metrics Consider Environmantal Sustainabilitys - A Proposal to o Combine Development Metrics with na Ecological Threshold Variable.  International Journal of Transdisciplinary Research Vol. 3, No. 1,  44-68.

Abstract:

Fifteen years after the global adoption of Sustainable Development as the crux of the development agenda, a very narrow range of metrics with little direct relation to sustainable development continues to dominate development policy at the international level. A concern is that these measures of development promote a vision of development that neglects environmental sustainability or worse invokes a vision of development that is unsustainable. This paper explores how combining development metrics with an ecological threshold variable provides a means to ensure that the pursuit of development objectives do not adversely impact environmental sustainability.

Contrasting and comparing sustainable development indicator metrics

Wilson.,  Tyedmers., Pelot.  2007. Contrasting and comparing sustainable development indicator metrics., Ecological Indicators 7 (2007) 299–314. 

Abstract:

Despite the fact that it has been well over a decade since Agenda 21 first called for sustainable development indicators, there is no consensus regarding the best approach to the design and use of SDI models. It is important, therefore, to question the effectiveness of SDIs in an effort to continue advancing sustainability. This paper addresses one aspect of this question by exploring whether our global SDI metrics are sending a clear message to guide us towards sustainable development. Six global SDI metrics are compared by relative ranking in colour coded tabular format and spatially in map format. The combined presentation of results clearly illustrates that the different metrics arrive at varying interpretations about the sustainability of nations. The degree of variability between the metrics is analyzed using correlation analysis. The variability in findings draws attention to the lack of a clear direction at the global level in how best to approach sustainable development. Canada is presented as a case study to highlight and explain the discrepancies between SDI measures.

Ecological Footprints of Canadian Municipalities and Regions

Wilson, J., Anielski., M,  2005,  Ecological Footprints of Canadian Municipalities and Regions., THE FEDERATION OF CANADIAN MUNICIPALITIES QUALITY OF LIFE REPORTING SYSTEM 

About this Report:

This report, completed by Anielski Management Inc., was commissioned by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) to develop the first Canadian estimates of the ecological footprint of each of the major Canadian municipalities/regions within the FCM family of member communities contributing to the FCM Quality of Life Indicators reporting system. This report examines the following issues.

1) What is the ecological footprint? How can it be used to measure sustainable living in Canadian municipalities?

2) How large are Canada’s municipal and regional ecological footprints? How do municipalities measure up and compare across the country?

3) How does the average ecological footprint per citizen in each municipality compare with Canada’s average and other benchmark regions of the world?

4) What are the major contributors to the ecological footprint?

5) How does the ecological footprint compare to the carrying capacity of Canada’s land and resources to meet our demands for nature’s goods and services?

6) How does the ecological footprint break down according to energy, food, transportation, and housing? What does the analysis tell us about sustainable living?

7) What is the relationship between ecological footprint, income and consumption?

8) What can citizens and municipalities do to reduce their ecological footprint?

9) How can the ecological footprint be applied to create more sustainable communities throughout Canada?