A framework for assessing the vulnerability of food systems to future shocks

Modem society depends on complex agro-ecological and trading systems to provide food for urban residents, yet there are few tools available to assess whether these systems are vulnerable to future disturbances. We propose a preliminary framework to assess the vulnerability of food systems to future shocks based on landscape ecology's 'Panarchy Framework'. According to Panarchy, ecosystem vulnerability is determined by three generic characteristics: (1) the wealth available in the system, (2) how connected the system is, and (3) how much diversity exists in the system. In this framework, wealthy, non-diverse, tightly connected systems are highly vulnerable. The wealth of food systems can be measured using the approach pioneered by development economists to assess how poverty affects food security. Diversity can be measured using the tools investors use to measure the diversity of investment portfolios to assess financial risk. The connectivity of a system can be evaluated with the tools chemists use to assess the pathways chemicals use to flow through the environment. This approach can lead to better tools for creating policy designed to reduce vulnerability, and can help urban or regional planners identify where food systems are vulnerable to shocks and disturbances that may occur in the future. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Capital substitutability and weak sustainability revisited: The conditions for capital substitution in the presence of risk

The capital approach is frequently used to model sustainability. A development is deemed to be sustainable when capital is not reduced. There are different definitions of sustainability, based on whether or not they allow that different forms of capital may be substituted for each other. A development that allows for the substitution of different forms of capital is called weakly sustainable. This article shows that in a risky world and a risk-averse society even under the assumptions of weak sustainability the circumstances under which different forms of capital may be substituted are limited. This is due to the risk-reducing effect of diversification. Using Modern Portfolio Theory this article shows under which conditions substitution of different forms of capital increases risk for future generations.

Bio-folio: applying portfolio theory to biodiversity

Genes, species and ecosystems are often considered to be assets. The need to ensure a sufficient diversity of this asset is being increasingly recognised today. Asset managers in banks and insurance companies face a similar challenge. They are asked to manage the assets of their investors by constructing efficient portfolios. They deliberately make use of a phenomenon observed in the formation of portfolios: returns are additive, while risks diversify. This phenomenon and its implications are at the heart of portfolio theory. Portfolio theory, like few other economic theories, has dramatically transformed the practical work of banks and insurance companies. Before portfolio theory was developed about 50 years ago, asset managers were confronted with a situation similar to the situation the research on biodiversity faces today. While the need for diversification was generally accepted, a concept that linked risk and return on a portfolio level and showed the value of diversification was missing. Portfolio theory has closed this gap. This article first explains the fundamentals of portfolio theory and transfers it to biodiversity. A large part of this article is then dedicated to some of the implications portfolio theory has for the valuation and management of biodiversity. The last section introduces three development openings for further research.

Sustainable Value Creation among Companies in the Manufacturing Sector

In this paper, we present empirical results of a study on the creation of Sustainable Value among European manufacturing companies. As sustainable development is a future oriented concept we assess the use of environmental resources in companies in the light of the EU15 performance targets for 2010. By using the Sustainable Value approach and based on publicly available company data we measure in monetary terms how individual companies perform vis-a-vis the 2010 performance targets already today. This shows the specific exposure and vulnerability of companies to more stringent policy regimes, and allows meaningful comparisons between both companies and sectors.

Value-oriented impact assessment: the economics of a new approach to impact assessment

Environmental Impact Assessment has gained a prominent position as a tool to evaluate the environmental effects of economic activities. However, all approaches proposed so far use a burden-oriented logic. They concentrate on the different environmental impacts in order to ascertain the overall environmental damage caused by economic activity. This paper argues that such a burden-oriented view is (a) hampered by a series of methodological shortcomings which hinders its widespread use in practice; and (b) is analytically incomplete. The paper proposes a value-oriented approach to impact assessment. For this purpose an economic analysis of the optimal use of environmental and social resources is conducted from both a burden-oriented and a value-oriented standpoint. The basic logic of a value-oriented impact assessment is explained, as well as the resulting economic conditions for an optimal use of resources. In addition, it is shown that value- and burden-oriented approaches are complementary to achieve optimality. Finally, the paper discusses the conditions under which the use of burden- or value-oriented impact assessments is appropriate, respectively.

Sustainable Value Added - ein neues Maß des Nachhaltigkeitsbeitrags von Unternehmen am Beispiel der Henkel KGaA

This article introduces a new approach to measure corporate contributions to sustainability called Sustainable Value Added. Existing approaches to measure sustainability are based on a comparative assessment of environmental and social burdens and can thus be characterised as burden-based approaches. However, these approaches suffer from severe limitations as a comparative assessment and aggregation of all relevant environmental and social burdens fails in practice. In contrast to these burden-based approaches Sustainable Value Added is value-based. It determines the value that is created by the reduced or increased use of different environmental and social resources. For this purpose the use of environmental and social resources is valued at their opportunity cost. Sustainable Value Added allows an integrated assessment of the economic, environmental, and social performance of a company and expresses the corporate contribution to sustainability in a single monetary indicator. This article explains the theoretical background of Sustainable Value Added, relates it to existing approaches to measure sustainability, and - using the example of Henkel KGaA - demonstrates its practical applicability.

Environmental Value Added - Ein neues Maß zur Messung der Öko-Effizienz. (Environmental Value Added. A new measure for the measurement of eco-efficiency)

To increase eco-efficiency environmental information needs to be integrated into corporate decision making. For decision makers the interpretation of eco-efficiency as a ratio can however be quite difficult in practice. One of the reasons for this is, that eco-efficiency as a ratio is measured in a unit, that is difficult to interpret. This article therefore suggests an alternative measure for eco-efficiency. The Environmental Value Added, the measure proposed in this paper, reflects the excess economic benefit, resulting from the difference between the eco-efficiency under consideration and a benchmark eco-efficiency. It is measured in a purely monetary unit and is thus easier to interpret and integrate than eco-efficiency as a ratio.

Environmental shareholder value. Economic success with corporate environmental management

The links between corporate environmental protection and economic success have been analysed vigorously in several theoretical and empirical studies. Most studies are based on the hypothesis that the amount of environmental protection is somehow - negatively or positively - correlated with the economic success of the company. We argue that the amount of corporate environmental protection per se neither spurs nor reduces shareholder value, which is maybe the most important measure of economic success at present. Moreover, the effect environmental protection exerts on shareholder value is determined by the manner in which corporate environmental management is practised. Referring to the value drivers of shareholder value, we discuss the characteristics necessary to increase shareholder value, or at least to contain any reduction as effectively as possible.