IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/sustdv/v30y2022i5p1184-1199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Supporting the Sustainable Development Goals: A context sensitive indicator for sustainable use of water at the facility level

Author

Listed:
  • Xuantong Wang
  • James Hopeward
  • Ilcheong Yi
  • Mark W. McElroy
  • Paul C. Sutton

Abstract

This paper presents a low‐cost and scalable method for providing a sustainable water allocation for enterprises based on the hydrological, economic, and demographic contexts of their facilities. Context‐based performance indicators are vital for effectively monitoring and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Currently, the SDGs consist of 17 goals that are associated with 169 targets and 232 indicators. Making valid and objective measurements of the 232 indicators represents a significant challenge for scientists and policy makers. Achieving the SDGs will likely involve significant efforts in developing and sustaining systems for monitoring status and progress, providing incentives, and conducting enforcement. Provision of low‐cost Sustainable Development Performance Indicators (SDPIs) of progress at high spatial and temporal resolution is essential for effective management by governments and businesses. The water allocations we produce are based on a facility's total and consumptive use of water, their contribution to gross domestic product (GDP), their number of full‐time employees, the population and GDP of several geographic contexts, and the annually specific hydrological balance (i.e., precipitation minus evapotranspiration) of those contexts. The allocations and related sustainability assessments are determined for a range of geographic contexts (circular regions centered on the facility with radii of 10, 50, 100, 200, and 300 km respectively). From the hydrological data we give priority to ‘Water for Nature’ and allocate a proportion of the remaining ‘Water for Economy’ to the facility based on their contribution to GDP and the number of full‐time employees they have. This allocation is compared to their actual water withdrawals to provide an indication of the sustainability of their economic activity.

Suggested Citation

  • Xuantong Wang & James Hopeward & Ilcheong Yi & Mark W. McElroy & Paul C. Sutton, 2022. "Supporting the Sustainable Development Goals: A context sensitive indicator for sustainable use of water at the facility level," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 1184-1199, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:sustdv:v:30:y:2022:i:5:p:1184-1199
    DOI: 10.1002/sd.2310
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2310
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sd.2310?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Natasha Sarin & Lawrence H. Summers, 2019. "Shrinking the Tax Gap: Approaches and Revenue Potential," NBER Working Papers 26475, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. David Cyranoski, 2019. "China feels the heat over rogue CFC emissions," Nature, Nature, vol. 571(7765), pages 309-310, July.
    3. Joachim H. Spangenberg, 2017. "Hot Air or Comprehensive Progress? A Critical Assessment of the SDGs," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 311-321, July.
    4. Mary Gearey, 2018. "Tales from the riverside: What community stories can tell us about sustainable water resources management practices," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(2), pages 132-140, March.
    5. Ana Andries & Stephen Morse & Richard Murphy & Jim Lynch & Emma Woolliams & John Fonweban, 2019. "Translation of Earth observation data into sustainable development indicators: An analytical framework," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(3), pages 366-376, May.
    6. Kubiszewski, Ida & Costanza, Robert & Franco, Carol & Lawn, Philip & Talberth, John & Jackson, Tim & Aylmer, Camille, 2013. "Beyond GDP: Measuring and achieving global genuine progress," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 57-68.
    7. Johan Rockström & Will Steffen & Kevin Noone & Åsa Persson & F. Stuart Chapin & Eric F. Lambin & Timothy M. Lenton & Marten Scheffer & Carl Folke & Hans Joachim Schellnhuber & Björn Nykvist & Cynthia , 2009. "A safe operating space for humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 461(7263), pages 472-475, September.
    8. Smakhtin, Vladimir U. & Revenga, C. & Doll, P., 2004. "Taking into account environmental water requirements in global-scale water resources assessments," IWMI Research Reports H031758, International Water Management Institute.
    9. Jason Hickel, 2019. "The contradiction of the sustainable development goals: Growth versus ecology on a finite planet," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(5), pages 873-884, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hametner, Markus, 2022. "Economics without ecology: How the SDGs fail to align socioeconomic development with environmental sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    2. Cameron Allen & Graciela Metternicht & Thomas Wiedmann, 2021. "Priorities for science to support national implementation of the sustainable development goals: A review of progress and gaps," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 635-652, July.
    3. Hervé Corvellec & Johan Hultman & Anne Jerneck & Susanne Arvidsson & Johan Ekroos & Niklas Wahlberg & Timothy W. Luke, 2021. "Resourcification: A non‐essentialist theory of resources for sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(6), pages 1249-1256, November.
    4. Virág, Doris & Wiedenhofer, Dominik & Baumgart, André & Matej, Sarah & Krausmann, Fridolin & Min, Jihoon & Rao, Narasimha D. & Haberl, Helmut, 2022. "How much infrastructure is required to support decent mobility for all? An exploratory assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    5. Nessa Winston, 2022. "Sustainable community development: Integrating social and environmental sustainability for sustainable housing and communities," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 191-202, February.
    6. Melgar-Melgar, Rigo E. & Hall, Charles A.S., 2020. "Why ecological economics needs to return to its roots: The biophysical foundation of socio-economic systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    7. Sievers-Glotzbach, Stefanie & Tschersich, Julia, 2019. "Overcoming the process-structure divide in conceptions of Social-Ecological Transformation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Kim, Yeon-Su & Rodrigues, Marcos & Robinne, François-Nicolas, 2021. "Economic drivers of global fire activity: A critical review using the DPSIR framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    9. Cook, David & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur, 2021. "An appraisal of interlinkages between macro-economic indicators of economic well-being and the sustainable development goals," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    10. Mariia Kostetckaia & Markus Hametner, 2022. "How Sustainable Development Goals interlinkages influence European Union countries’ progress towards the 2030 Agenda," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 916-926, October.
    11. Bastianoni, Simone & Coscieme, Luca & Pulselli, Federico M., 2016. "The input-state-output model and related indicators to investigate the relationships among environment, society and economy," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 325(C), pages 84-88.
    12. Zeug, Walther & Bezama, Alberto & Thrän, Daniela, 2020. "Towards a holistic and integrated Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of the bioeconomy: Background on concepts, visions and measurements," UFZ Discussion Papers 7/2020, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    13. Ribas, Aline & Lucena, André F.P. & Schaeffer, Roberto, 2017. "Bridging the energy divide and securing higher collective well-being in a climate-constrained world," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 435-450.
    14. Tadashi Hirai, 2022. "A balancing act between economic growth and sustainable development: Historical trajectory through the lens of development indicators," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1900-1910, December.
    15. Jóhannesson, S.E. & Davíðsdóttir, B. & Heinonen, J.T., 2018. "Standard Ecological Footprint Method for Small, Highly Specialized Economies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 370-380.
    16. Rosa Puertas & Luisa Marti, 2023. "Regional analysis of the sustainable development of two Mediterranean countries: Spain and Italy," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 797-811, April.
    17. Patrick Moriarty & Damon Honnery, 2020. "New Approaches for Ecological and Social Sustainability in a Post-Pandemic World," World, MDPI, vol. 1(3), pages 1-14, October.
    18. Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Coscieme, Luca & Costanza, Robert & Kubiszewski, Ida & Trebeck, Katherine & Wallis, Stewart & Roberts, Debra & Mortensen, Lars F. & Pickett, Kate E. & Wilkinson, Richard & Ragnar, 2022. "Wellbeing economy: An effective paradigm to mainstream post-growth policies?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    19. Zhang, Chao & Chen, Wei-Qiang & Liu, Gang & Zhu, Da-Jian, 2017. "Economic Growth and the Evolution of Material Cycles: An Analytical Framework Integrating Material Flow and Stock Indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 265-274.
    20. Huiyuan Guan & Yongping Bai & Chunyue Zhang, 2022. "Research on Ecosystem Security and Restoration Pattern of Urban Agglomeration in the Yellow River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:sustdv:v:30:y:2022:i:5:p:1184-1199. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1719 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.