This post is based on the Report ‘Global Environmental Performance Index’
released in 2016. The 2016 Environmental Performance Index is
a project led by the Yale University and Columbia University, in collaboration
with the Samuel Family Foundation, McCall MacBain Foundation, and the World
Economic Forum.
The Environmental Performance Index (EPI) ranks countries’ performance
on high-priority environmental issues in two areas:
· protection of human health and
· protection of ecosystems.
Within these two policy objectives the EPI scores national performance
in nine issue areas comprised of more than 20 indicators. EPI indicators
measure country proximity to meeting internationally established targets or, in
the absence of agreed targets, how nations compare to one another. EPI’s
indicators are aligned with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (Chapter 17 of
the book).
The key findings of the 2016 EPI Report are:
1. More deaths globally occur due to poor air
quality than water.
2. More than 3.5 billion people – half of the
world’s population – live in nations with unsafe air quality.
3. The number of people lacking access to
clean water has been nearly cut in half from 960 million in 2000 to 550 million
today, around 8% of the world’s population. 2.4 billion people lack access to
sanitation.
4. 34% of global fish stocks are over-
exploited or collapsed.
5. 15.4% of terrestrial habitats and 8.4% of
marine habitats in 2014 were protected.
6. 2.52 million sq km for tree cover was lost in
2014 – an area roughly twice the size of Peru.
7. 23% of countries have no wastewater
treatment.
8. Only 20% of countries are meeting targets
for Nitrogen Use Efficiency.
9. Around one-third of countries scored on
Climate and Energy are reducing their carbon intensity.
The
overall conclusions of the Report are:
· The world is making progress addressing some
environmental issues while others have worsened considerably.
· Economic development leads to improvement in
some environmental areas, yet development is also associated with increased
prevalence of environmental hazards.
·
When measurement
is poor or not aligned with proper management, environmental and human health
suffer.
· Developing policy relevant indicators based in
science is essential to appropriate measurement and management.
· The 2015 Paris Climate Agreement specifies
climate change action expected from all countries, yet solid metrics to
evaluate performance remain elusive.
Out of
the 180 countries that were assessed, the top five were:
1. Finland
2. Iceland
3. Sweden
4. Denmark
5. Slovenia
6. Spain
7. Portugal
8. Estonia
9. Malta
The
bottom five countries were:
176.
Afghanistan
177.
Niger
178. Madagascar
179. Eritrea
180. Somalia
The
ranks of selected countries in our region were:
63.
Malaysia
66.
Philippines
80.
South Korea
91.
Thailand
107.
Indonesia
108. Sri
Lanka
109.
China
110.
Bhutan
141.
India
144.
Pakistan
149.
Nepal
153.
Myanmar
173.
Bangladesh
Clearly,
India has a long way to go with regard to the environment. China is doing much
better than India. Given the government’s focus on ‘development’, environmental
indicators are bound to worsen. We have projects such as climate change missions,
Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, and Ganga Rejuvenation, but there is no real improvement
in environmental indicators. 'Sustainable Development' is a big challenge to the country.
(This post relates to Chapter 17 of the book.)
