Triple Bottom Indicators

Sustainability is widely regarded as a journey, not a destination (Scott, 2005). It is generally accepted that the sustainability concept has three distinct, but related ecological, economic and social components (Global Reporting Initiative, 2002). The term “triple bottom” describes performance reporting against economic, social and environmental parameters and departure from previous bottom line perspectives which traditionally focused on financial considerations (Elkington, 1997). At its broadest, the term is used to capture the whole set of values, issues and processes that companies must address in order to minimize any harm resulting from their activities and to create economic, social and environmental value (Sustainability, 2005). Therefore, sustainability involves at a minimum interacting economic, social, and environmental factor. Progress toward sustainability thus requires directing policy attention to all three (Hammond and Adriaanse et al., 1995 cited in Scott, 2005).

For more than half a century, gross domestic product (GDP), which measures production and consumption activities in an economy, has served as the flagship indicator of progress and well‑ being. Today, however, most agree that GDP provides misleading signals about both current well-being and future prosperity (EEA, 2013). Many aspects of human well-being such as liberty, family life, social cohesion and safety from harm, are partially or wholly absent from such economic measures. From a public health perspective, the health and well-being of populations and individuals is influenced by social, economic and environmental determinants. These may interact through multiple pathways at different spatial scales from local conditions up to global drivers of change (Barton and Grant, 2006 and EEA, 2010).

The relative strengths and weaknesses of the different instruments with respect to those criteria indicate that the best choice of instruments will vary by environmental issue as well as across country- or region- specific circumstances. Indeed, given the presence of several interacting market failures, the most appropriate green growth policy response will, in most cases, require a combination of instruments. This combination will differ depending on a country’s stage of development, its particular environmental concerns, political economy considerations, the importance of different natural assets to a country’s growth prospects and social preferences (OCED, 2011).

2.12.3.1 Economic Indicators

There might be so many questions asked with regard to sustainable growth. For instance, in this study, how can a green community create a sustainable economy? This question gets due attention for further description of economic indicators. On the other hand, Guy (2010) pointed out that looks at your current economic conditions and learns how they are linked to social and environmental issues. Hence, key economic sustainability indicators include: production area, yield, quality, gross value, profitability and regional economic activity (Guy, 2010). Employment and profitability have historically been major indicators used by regions to reflect economic success, but communities want to give greater consideration to environmental and social implications of any actions (UNEP, 2011). It is, therefore, useful to use economic indicators to provide information on current conditions, trends and movements towards targets (UNEP, 2012).

For most countries, instruments that directly impact price signals are a necessary, though not always sufficient, condition for greening growth. The main strengths of market-based instruments are that, if well- designed, they modify price signals so that they internalise externalities like pollution and that all factors of production, including natural capital, are properly valued. They can thus set the right incentives for broadly based actions that reduce environmental damage with the least resource cost, and also promote and guide “green” innovation. Hence, at their most simple, prices on large point source pollutants, such as large industrial installations, or on large scale resource use such as mining or water abstraction, are relatively simple to administer (OCED, 2011).

2.12.3.2 Social Indicators

Health and wellbeing indicators developed by EEA (2013) convey that the complex nature of the relations between the environment and human health and well-being. In their work, the impacts component is separated into two elements; exposure' and 'effects'. This helps to clarify the link from the environment's state, to human exposure to hazards, and on to measurable effects on health and well-being (Corválan et

al., 1996). The demographics measured in our community starts to tell us how the population is distributed.

However, social indicators also measure our social well-being and quality-of life. Green communities offer equal opportunity, social harmony, and mutual respect for a diverse community (UNEP, 2011). So that major social sustainability indicators include education levels, demographics, employment, health, community attitudes, social capital, research and development and compliance with the law (Guy, 2010). Characterising the structure of social capital involves describing the size and density of networks, while the content of social capital includes the degree of trust and prevalence of reciprocity with networks (Johnson

et al., 2005).

In recent years, the importance of "human capital" and social development to overall development has been emphasized by the Human Development Index pioneered by the United Nation Development Programme (UNDP, 2009). So too, indicators of sustainable development must also reflect the degree to which human needs including that for a safe, healthy, and productive environment are met. Thus, measures of environmental impacts on human health and welfare are key to sustainability either as environmental indicators or as components of social indicators. Equally important are measures of the degree to which exposure to pollution or access to clean water and clean air vary among social and

economic groups. There are certainly subjective elements in quantifying well-being for example happiness and satisfaction, pain and worry there is a growing consensus on a range of objectively measurable factors that contribute to quality of life. These include criteria such as health, a healthy living environment, education, social equity, participation in the political process and personal and economic security (EEA, 2013).

OECD (2013b) has identified eleven dimensions that contribute to well-being namely; community, education, environment, civic engagement, health, housing, income, jobs, life satisfaction, safety, and work- life balance. The OECD (2013) places each of these dimensions of well-being into one of three 'pillars': material living conditions; sustainability; and quality of life. Moreover, (Gut, 2010) uses key social sustainability indicators such as education levels, demographics, employment, health, community attitudes, social capital, research and development and compliance with the law to measure economic, environment and social sustainability indicators of the Australian cotton industry. Within this respect, it was relevant to use these and others social indicators to assess the tradeoffs between consumption growth and green environmental problems in Kombolecha.

2.12.3.3 Environment Indicators

The European environment state and outlook 2010: synthesis (EEA, 2010d) emphasised the increasingly systemic nature of environmental challenges and highlighted the need for greening the economy. EEA (2012) initiated a series of annual environmental indicator reports aimed at analysing selected issues in more depth. The first report in the series, the environmental indicator report (2012), measured progress towards the green economy, focusing on two key aspects of the transition: resource efficiency and ecosystem resilience. However, they argued that while improving resource efficiency remains necessary, it may not be sufficient to conserve the natural environment and the essential services it provides in support of economic prosperity and cohesion. UNEP (2013) environmental indicator report extends the analysis of the green economy, which focuses on the environmental pressures associated with the resource use patterns and impact on human health and well-being.

Mapping the diverse connections between environmental change and human health impacts involves considerable conceptual complexities and relies on a relatively fragmented evidence base. Known health

issues are linked to resource-use patterns and associated environmental pressures. In this case, environmental indicators describe the effects of human activities on the environment as well as the implications of those actions on human health, quality of life and the integrity of ecosystems. Environmental indicators are usually scientifically-based information that describes environmental conditions and trends (UNEP, 2011). Key environmental sustainability indicators were including soil, water, solid and liquid waste, biodiversity and greenhouse emissions. However, these generally give a ‘point in time’ picture rather than a long term trend and are rarely industry wide (Guy, 2010).In this study, environmental indicators included werewater quantity limit and waste recycling efficiency in the course of consumer’s consumption processes.