Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Ecological inequality in assessing well-being: Some applications

  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Claims to the inadequacy of GDP growth as an indicator of well-being improvement are widespread. Yet the notion of well-being is very broad, hence difficult to quantify, so alternative indexes (e.g., ISEW, GPI) may also be deficient. This article approaches well-being from a multi-dimensional perspective which, unlike earlier attempts to incorporate inequality and environmental variables, focuses especially on “ecological inequality,” or inequality in the distribution of the social cost associated with resource depletion. A methodology for assessing well-being improvements is developed, one which includes an accounting for ecological inequality, and is applied to four countries: Brazil, Costa Rica, Indonesia, and the Philippines. The variability in the results strongly suggests that in addition to depending on the subjective perspective of the policymaker regarding the relative importance of the income growth realized by different population groups, well-being assessments depend critically on the existing ecological distribution. More research into quantifying ecological distribution is therefore warranted. Absent significant progress in this area, sensitivity analysis such as that conducted here may inform policy better than GDP or alternative well-being indexes or aggregates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahluwalia, M. and H. Chenery (1974). ‘The economic framework,’ in H. Chenery, M. Ahluwalia, C. L. G. Bell, J. H. Dully, and R. Jolly, eds., Redistribution with Growth, London: Oxford University Press, pp. 38–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asheim, G. (2002). ‘Green national accounting for welfare and sustainability: A taxonomy of assumptions and results’, Center for Economic Studies, Working Paper Series No. 827.

  • Barrera, A. (1997). ‘Degrees of unmet needs in the Superfluous Income Criterion,’ Review of Social Economy 55: 460–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartelmus, P. (1997). ‘Whither economics? From optimality to sustainability?,’ Environment and Development Economics 2: 323–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartelmus, P. and E. Seifert (2003). Green Accounting, The International Library of Environmental Economics and Policy Series, Aldershot: Ashgate Press.

  • Boyce, J. K. (1994). ‘Inequality as a cause of environmental degradation,’ Ecological Economics 11: 169–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullard, R. (2000). Dumping in Dixie: Race, Class, and Environmental Quality, 3rd ed., Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, R. L. (1992). ‘Political ecology: An emerging research agenda in third-world studies’, Political Geography 11: 12–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castañeda, B. (1997). ‘An index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW) for Chile,’ Institute of Ecological Economics, Solomons, MD, pp. 34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, C., T. Halstead and J. Rowe (1995). ‘If GDP is up, why is America down?,’ Atlantic Monthly 276: 59–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Common, M. and C. Perrings (1992). ‘Towards an ecological economics of sustainability,’ Ecological Economics 6: 7–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R., R. d'Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R. V. O'Neill, H. Paruelo, R. G. Raskin, P. Sutton and M. van den Belt (1997). ‘The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital’, Nature 15: 253–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruz, W. and R. Repetto (1992). The Environmental Effects of Stabilization and Structural Adjustment Programs: The Philippines Case, Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, H. (1991). Steady-State Economics, 2nd ed., Washington D.C. and Covelo: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, H. and J. Cobb (1989). For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy towards Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future, Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, P. (1995). ‘Economic development and the environment: Issues, policies, and the political economy’, in M.G. Quibria, ed., Critical Issues in Asian Development, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 160–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, P. and K. Mäler (2000). ‘Net national product, wealth, and social well-being’, Environment and Development Economics 5: 69–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, P. and D. Anderton (2000). ‘Demographics of dumping II: A national environmental equity survey and the distribution of hazardous materials handlers’, Demography 37: 461–466.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ekins, P. (2000). Economic Growth and Environmental Sustainability: The Prospects for Green Growth, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harberger, A. C. (1984). ‘Basic needs versus distribution weights in social cost-benefit analysis’, Economic Development and Cultural Change 32: 455–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, A. (1989). ‘Introducing natural capital into the SNA’, in Y. J. Ahmad, S. El Serafy and E. Lutz, eds., Environmental Accounting for Sustainable Development, Washington, DC: World Bank, pp. 19–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan, H. A. (1997). ‘Ecology, inequality, and poverty: The case of Bangladesh’, Asian Development Review 15: 164–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawn, P. (2003). ‘A theoretical foundation to support the index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW), Genuine progress indicator (GPI), and other related indexes,’ Ecological Economics 44: 105–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leipert, C. (1987). ‘A critical appraisal of gross national product: The measurement of net national welfare and environmental accounting’, Journal of Economic Issues 21: 357–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lélé, S. (1991). ‘Sustainable development: A critical review’, World Development 19: 607–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levett, R. (1998). ‘Sustainability indicators – integrating quality of life and environmental protection,’ Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 161: 291–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutz, E., ed. (1993). Towards Improved Accounting for the Environment, Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Alier, J. (1993). ‘Distributional obstacles to international environmental policy: The failures at rio and prospects after rio,’ Environmental Values 2: 97–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Alier, J. (1995). ‘Distributional issues in ecological economics,’ Review of Social Economy 53: 511–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Alier, J. (1997). ‘Some issues in agrarian and ecological economics, in memory of georgescu-roegen,’ Ecological Economics 22: 225–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Max-Neef, M. (1995). ‘Economic growth and quality of life: A threshold hypothesis,’ Ecological Economics 15: 115–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millikan, B. H. (1992). ‘Tropical deforestation, land degradation, and society: Lessons from Rondônia, Brazil,’ Latin American Perspectives 19: 45–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. S. (1993). ‘Contesting Terrain in Zimbabwe's Eastern Highlands: Political Ecology, Ethnography, and Peasant Resource Struggles,’ Economic Geography 69: 380–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, D. (1980). Measuring the Condition of the World's Poor: The Physical Quality of Life Index, New York: Pergamon Press for the Overseas Development Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumayer, E. (2000). ‘On the Methodology of ISEW, GPI, and Related Measures: Some Constructive Comments and Some Doubt on the Threshold Hypothesis,’ Ecological Economics 34: 347–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordhaus, W. and J. Tobin (1972). ‘Is Growth Obsolete?’ in M. Moss (ed.), The Measurement of Economic and Social Performance, Studies in Income and Wealth, Vol. 38, National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Pearce, D., K. Hamilton, and G. Atkinson (1996). ‘Measuring Sustainable Development: Progress on Indicators,’ Environment and Development Economics 1: 85–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peet, R. and M. Watts (1993). ‘Introduction: Development Theory and Environment in an Age of Market Triumphalism,’ Economic Geography 69: 227–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peluso, N. L. (1992). ‘The Political Ecology of Extraction and Extractive Reserves in East Kalimantan, Indonesia,’ Development and Change 23: 49–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrings, C. (1995). ‘Ecology, economics, and ecological economics,’ Ambio 24: 60–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prescott-Allen, R. (2001). The Well-Being of Nations, Washington DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pezzoli, K. (1997). ‘Sustainable development: A transdisciplinary overview of the literature,’ Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 40: 549–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Repetto, R., W. Magrath, M. Wells, C. Beer and F. Rossini (1989). Wasting Assets: Natural Resources in the National Income Accounts. Washington DC: World Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringquist, E. (1998). ‘A question of justice: Equity in environmental litigation, 1974–1991,’ Journal of Politics 60: 1148–1165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Røpke, I. (1997). ‘Economic growth and the environment – or the extinction of the GDP Dinosaur,’ in A. Tylecote and J. van der Straaten (eds.), Environment, Technology, and Economic Growth: The Challenge to Sustainable Development, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 55–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmink, M. and C. H. Wood (1987). ‘The “Political Ecology” of Amazonia,’ in P. D. Little, M. M. Horowitz and A. E. Nyerges, eds., Lands at Risk in the Third World: Local-Level Perspectives, Boulder: Westview Press, pp. 38–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solórzano, R., R. De Camino, R. Woodward, J. Tosi, V. Watson, A. Vásquez, C. Villalobos and J. Jiménez (1991). Accounts Overdue: Natural Resource Depreciation in Costa Rica, Washington DC: World Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stockhammer, E., H. Hochreiter, B. Obermayr and K. Steiner (1997). ‘The index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW) as an alternative to GDP in measuring economic welfare. The results of the Austrian (revised) ISEW calculation 1955–1992,’ Ecological Economics 21: 19–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torras, M. (2000). ‘Sustainability or natural capital “Disinvestment?’ A retrospective on brazilian development, 1965–1993,’ Estudos Econômicos 30: 351–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNDP (1999). Human Development Report, United Nations Development Programme Reports.

  • Young, C. E. F. and R. Serôa da Motta (1995). ‘Measuring sustainable income from mineral extraction in Brazil,’ Resources Policy 21: 113–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Adelphi University, New York, USA

    Mariano Torras

Authors
  1. Mariano Torras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Torras, M. Ecological inequality in assessing well-being: Some applications. Policy Sci 38, 205–224 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-005-9003-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-005-9003-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation