Energy sustainability indicators for urban environments

Sustainable development comprises of three dimensions. The three dimensions are the environment, the social and the economic. There have been many indicators used to measure the three dimensions of sustainability. For example air pollution, consumption of natural resources, quality of open space, noise, equity and opportunities and economic benefits from transport and land use. Urban areas constitute the most crucial factor in the sustainability. Urban systems affect and are affected by natural systems beyond their physical boundaries and in general the interdependence between the urban system and the regional and global environment is not reflected in urban decision making. The use of energy in the urban system constitutes the major element in the construction and function of urban areas. Energy impacts across the boundaries of the three dimensions of sustainability. The objective of this research is to apply energy-use-indicators to the urban system as a measure of sustainability. This methodology is applied to a case study in the United Kingdom.

Assessing the sensitivity and specificity of fish community indicators to management action

We assessed ten trophodynamic indicators of ecosystem status for their sensitivity and specificity to fishing management using a size-resolved multispecies fish community model. The responses of indicators to fishing depended on effort and the size selectivity (sigmoid or Gaussian) of fishing mortality. The highest specificity against sigmoid (trawl-like) size selection was seen from inverse fishing pressure and the large fish indicator, but for Gaussian size selection, the large species indicator was most specific. Biomass, mean trophic level of the community and of the catch, and fishing in balance had the lowest specificity against both size selectivities. Length-based indicators weighted by biomass, rather than abundance, were more sensitive and specific to fishing pressure. Most indicators showed a greater response to sigmoid than Gaussian size selection. Indicators were generally more sensitive at low levels of effort because of nonlinear sensitivity in trophic cascades to fishing mortality. No single indicator emerged as superior in all respects, so given available data, multiple complementary indicators are recommended for community monitoring in the ecosystem approach to fisheries management.

Using vulnerability performance indicators to attain food supply chain robustness

High effectiveness and leanness of modern supply chains (SCs) increase their vulnerability, i.e. susceptibility to disturbances reflected in non-robust SC performances. Both the SC management literature and SC professionals indicate the need for the development of SC vulnerability assessment tools. In this article, a new method for vulnerability assessment, the VULA method, is presented. The VULA method helps to identify how much a company would underperform on a specific Key Performance Indicator in the case of a disturbance, how often this would happen and how long it would last. It ultimately informs the decision about whether process redesign is appropriate and what kind of redesign strategies should be used in order to increase the SC's robustness. The applicability of the VULA method is demonstrated in the context of a meat SC using discrete-event simulation to conduct the performance analysis.

Demersal fish biodiversity: species-level indicators and trends-based targets for the Marine Strategy Framework Directive

The maintenance of biodiversity is a fundamental theme of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Appropriate indicators to monitor change in biodiversity, along with associated targets representing "good environmental status" (GES), are required to be in place by July 2012. A method for selecting species-specific metrics to fulfil various specified indicator roles is proposed for demersal fish communities. Available data frequently do not extend far enough back in time to allow GES to be defined empirically. In such situations, trends-based targets offer a pragmatic solution. A method is proposed for setting indicator-level targets for the number of species-specific metrics required to meet their trends-based metric-level targets. This is based on demonstrating significant departures from the binomial distribution. The procedure is trialled using North Sea demersal fish survey data. Although fisheries management in the North Sea has improved in recent decades, management goals to stop further decline in biodiversity, and to initiate recovery, are yet to be met.

Comparing Poverty Indicators in an Enlarged European Union

In this article, we explore the extent to which a consideration of welfare regime and socioeconomic differences in poverty levels and patterns can assist us in making an informed assessment of alternative poverty indicators. Poverty in the EU is normally defined in terms of income thresholds at the level of each member state. However, with the enlargement of the EU, such measures have come in for increasing criticism. One set of reservation relates to the limitations imposed by an entirely national frame of reference. An alternative critique focuses on the fact that low income is an unreliable indicator of poverty. In this article, we seek to explore the strength of both arguments by comparing the outcomes associated with ‘at risk of poverty’ and consistent poverty at both national and EU levels. Developing an appropriate assessment of poverty levels in the enlarged EU, particularly in periods of rapid change, is likely to require that we make use of a number of indicators none of which capture the full complexity of cross-national poverty outcomes. However, our analysis suggests that if a choice is to be made between the available indicators, the ‘mixed consistent poverty’ indicator developed in this study is best suited to achieving the stated EU objective of assessing the scale of exclusion from minimally acceptable standards of living in individual countries while also measuring the extent to which the whole population of Europe is sharing in the benefits of high average prosperity.

Using Non-Monetary Deprivation Indicators to Analyze Poverty and Social Exclusion: Lessons from Europe?

Non-monetary indicators of deprivation are now widely used in studying poverty in Europe. While measuring financial resources remains central, having reliable information about material deprivation adds to the ability to capture poverty and social exclusion. Non-monetary indicators can help improve the identification of those experiencing poverty and understand how it comes about. They are most productively used when multidimensionality is explicitly taken into account, both in framing the question and in empirical application. While serious methodological and measurement issues remain to be addressed, material deprivation indicators allow for new insights in making poverty comparisons across countries and analyzing changes over time. (C) 2010 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

Identifying childhood deprivation:How well do national indicators of poverty and social exclusion in Ireland Perform?

In the context of the significance that the life-cycle has been afforded in social policy discussion in Ireland, current national measures of poverty and social exclusion have been criticised for failing to capture such phenomena accurately in relation to particular stages of the life-course. In this paper we have taken advantage of the inclusion of a special module on childhood deprivation in EU-SILC 2009 to create reliable measures of both household basic deprivation and childhood deprivation. Overall, our analysis leads us to the conclusion that those exposed to childhood deprivation are generally a sub-set of the children captured by population indicators. Adopting a multidimensional and dynamic perspective on household resources and deprivation enables us to capture the large majority of children exposed to childhood deprivation. Restricting our attention to childhood deprivation would lead us to miss out on a significant number of children living in households experiencing basic deprivation but not exposed to childhood deprivation. It would be unwise to assume that such deprivation has no consequences for children. While there is clearly a value in supplementing existing national measures with child specific indicators, it would not appear sensible to rely solely on the latter.