Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Ecological inequality in assessing well-being: Some applications

Contents:

Author Info

  • Mariano Torras
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Claims to the inadequacy of GDP growth as an indicator of well-being improvement are widespread. Yet the notion of well-being is very broad, hence difficult to quantify, so alternative indexes (e.g., ISEW, GPI) may also be deficient. This article approaches well-being from a multi-dimensional perspective which, unlike earlier attempts to incorporate inequality and environmental variables, focuses especially on “ecological inequality,â€\x9D or inequality in the distribution of the social cost associated with resource depletion. A methodology for assessing well-being improvements is developed, one which includes an accounting for ecological inequality, and is applied to four countries: Brazil, Costa Rica, Indonesia, and the Philippines. The variability in the results strongly suggests that in addition to depending on the subjective perspective of the policymaker regarding the relative importance of the income growth realized by different population groups, well-being assessments depend critically on the existing ecological distribution. More research into quantifying ecological distribution is therefore warranted. Absent significant progress in this area, sensitivity analysis such as that conducted here may inform policy better than GDP or alternative well-being indexes or aggregates. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11077-005-9003-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Springer in its journal Policy Sciences.

    Volume (Year): 38 (2005)
    Issue (Month): 4 (December)
    Pages: 205-224

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:38:y:2005:i:4:p:205-224

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=102982

    Related research

    Keywords:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. O.P. Albino Barrera, 1997. "Degrees of Unmet Needs in the Superfluous Income Criterion," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(4), pages 464-486.
    2. Boyce, James K., 1994. "Inequality as a cause of environmental degradation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 169-178, December.
    3. Martinez-Alier, J., 1997. "Some issues in agrarian and ecological economics, in memory of Georgescu-Roegen," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 225-238, September.
    4. Bartelmus, Peter, 1997. "Whither economics? From optimality to sustainability?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(03), pages 323-345, July.
    5. Geir B. Asheim, 2003. "Green national accounting for welfare and sustainability:A Taxonomy Of Assumptions And Results," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 50(2), pages 113-130, 05.
    6. J. Martinez-Alier, 1993. "Distributional Obstacles to International Environmental Policy: The Failures at Rio and Prospects after Rio," Environmental Values, White Horse Press, vol. 2(2), pages 97-114, May.
    7. Pearce, David & Hamilton, Kirk & Atkinson, Giles, 1996. "Measuring sustainable development: progress on indicators," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(01), pages 85-101, February.
    8. Harberger, Arnold C, 1984. "Basic Needs versus Distributional Weights in Social Cost-Benefit Analysis," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(3), pages 455-74, April.
    9. Common, Mick & Perrings, Charles, 1992. "Towards an ecological economics of sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 7-34, July.
    10. Keith Pezzoli, 1997. "Sustainable Development: A Transdisciplinary Overview of the Literature," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(5), pages 549-574.
    11. Max-Neef, Manfred, 1995. "Economic growth and quality of life: a threshold hypothesis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 115-118, November.
    12. Dasgupta, Partha & M Ler, Karl-G Ran, 2000. "Net national product, wealth, and social well-being," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(01), pages 69-93, February.
    13. James Boyce, 1994. "Inequality as a Cause of Environmental Degradation," Published Studies ps1, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
    14. Young, Carlos Eduardo Frickmann & da Motta, Ronaldo Seroa, 1995. "Measuring sustainable income from mineral extraction in Brazil," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 113-125, June.
    15. Lawn, Philip A., 2003. "A theoretical foundation to support the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW), Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), and other related indexes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 105-118, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Floriane Clement, 2010. "Analysing decentralised natural resource governance: proposition for a “politicised” institutional analysis and development framework," Policy Sciences, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 129-156, June.

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:38:y:2005:i:4:p:205-224. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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