|
|
From Rio to Johannesburg: Contents |
A Four country groups in comparison
The Dashboard's standard view permits a quick comparison between individual countries or
groups of countries. Here, four groups of countries are compared to each other for the
year 2000, based on the Agenda 21 structure. It is no surprise that the Least Developed
Countries have serious social problems. Below each of the four indices, there are more
indicators - see next page.
B Africa: a continent at one glance
In this view, the four main clusters are disaggregated into the underlying indicators,
which are based on the UN CSD set. Africa scores remarkably well for some social variables
(F/M wages, crime) and many environmental indicators; overall, however, the situation is
"in the red".
C Social indicators
More detail for the social indicators: Africa at the time of the WSSD has serious problems
for most social issues.
This view has two big dials, and there is enough space to use the full indicator name. For
the right window, you can choose a second dial, a "D" (distribution) or
"S" (scatterplot) view.
D Analysis View
Two small dials plus one big window: this setting allows a more analytical view, e.g. a
scatterplot or the indicator distribution, as in this example, showing the Gini
coefficient. In the Dashboard software, press F6 to see the detailed methodological notes
for this indicator in a Word document (it is recommended to open MS Word before pressing
F6).
E Life Expectancy Map of Africa
The "analysis window" can be a map, e.g. showing life expectancy in the group
"ACP-Islands".
In the Dashboard, you can see also the year 1990, and the trend 1990-2000 (check
Botswana!): just press arrow up and down to choose the year.
F Life Expectancy vs. Income per capita
Is there a link between life expectancy and income? The Dashboard permits scatterplot
pairs between all indicators, and the X-axis can be displayed as "plain" or LOG
values. This example shows that there is an excellent correlation between 'Life expectancy
at birth' logarithm of 'Income per capita'. Tajikistan and Botswana do not strictly follow
this rule, though...
G Time Series View
The Dashboard permits also simple bar graphs for comparing indicators over time. In this
example, the overall Sustainable Development Index (SDI) for Africa and the OECD countries
is shown. Apparently, OECD has lost some points, while Africa improved considerably. If
you want to know why, you have to click into the Soc/Env/Eco/Ins boxes to see the
disaggregated results. Remember the CSD indicator set was not designed with aggregation in
mind, and that all indicators in these examples have equal weights...
H Linkage Analysis
With just one mouse click, you can produce a sorted list of the most relevant correlations
between the indicators of the set. The task of interpretation is yours, however: why is a
low population growth rate in OECD states associated with a better environment?
I Design your own set
Last but not least, you should take the occasion and define yourself what is
"Sustainable Development" - play with the weights, and choose from the available
indicator pool those that should be part of a Sustainable Development Index! The * behind
the titles signals that these indices were modified.
J The HDI as a CSD subset
The HDI with its three indicators can be seen as a subset of the UN CSD indicator set. In
this view, the HDI indicators have been moved into the "Ins" (Institutions)
pane, so that the HDI can be displayed as a Dashboard. Within the country group
EU-15+Least DC, Portugal scores "fair", while Myanmar/Burma reaches only a
"bad" valuation.
K Why the HDI is not sufficient
Life expectancy at birth is perhaps the most important social indicator, and rightly has
been given one third of the HDI's share. However, a high or low life expectancy is a very
late result of good or bad policy choices - this indicator judges governments that have
been in power decades ago! Fortunately, life expectancy is perfectly correlated with the
Social index. The latter is composed of indicators that can indeed be influenced by
current governments, and therefore the message of the Social index is much more
policy-relevant than the message of "Life expectancy at birth".
L Globalisation I
How should an indicator set on globalisation look like? There is no lack of ideas in the
movements; however, the World Social Forum slogan "Another World is Possible"
fails to explain what are the criteria for a "better globalisation". Here, a
tailored set is presented (group: Least DC), but it is a personal choice without any
democratic legitimation - and of course limited to the available indicators of the CSD
set.
M Globalisation II
One important theme of globalisation is cultural identity. The current structure of Agenda
21 has "institutions" as its 4th theme, but maybe "Culture and
Governance" would be a better title for this important area that is not covered by
the environmental, economic and social clusters of Agenda 21. The choice of indicators,
however, is still very limited, as shown in this example (group: ACP).
N State 2000 vs. Trend 1990-2000
This new feature allows to see where countries are, and where they are heading. Rwanda
scores "critical" for the current state of "Life expectancy at birth"
- for the trend of this indicator, see Rwanda's position on the X-Axis.
O State 1990 vs. Trend 1990-2000
Again, a state vs. trend analysis, but this time starting with the 1990 situation.
Countries that scored well in 1990 for 'Access to piped water' improved very little, while
countries with a deficit, like Djibouti, improved drastically.
P South America
Social for South America: best in the group is Cuba, at the bottom of the list Haiti.
Brazil scores 584 points (rank 18 of 26), "fair" on the Dashboard scale. In
contrast, Argentine gets 720 points and the mark "good".