Environmental Performance Index

Last updated
Countries by Environmental Performance Index (2020) 2020 EPI Map World.png
Countries by Environmental Performance Index (2020)

The Environmental Performance Index (EPI) is a method of quantifying and numerically marking the environmental performance of a state's policies. This index was developed from the Pilot Environmental Performance Index, first published in 2002, and designed to supplement the environmental targets set forth in the United Nations Millennium Development Goals. [1]

Contents

The EPI was preceded by the Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI), published between 1999 and 2005. Both indices were developed by Yale University (Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy) and Columbia University (Center for International Earth Science Information Network) in collaboration with the World Economic Forum and the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission. The ESI was developed to evaluate environmental sustainability relative to the paths of other countries. Due to a shift in focus by the teams developing the ESI, the EPI uses outcome-oriented indicators, then working as a benchmark index that can be more easily used by policy makers, environmental scientists, advocates and the general public. [2] Other leading indices like the Global Green Economy Index (GGEI) [3] provide an integrated measure of the environmental, social and economic dynamics of national economies. The GGEI utilizes EPI data for the environmental dimension of the index while also providing a performance assessment of efficiency sectors (e.g. transport, buildings, energy), investment, green innovation and national leadership around climate change.

The EPI for the year 2022 ranks 180 countries. The top five countries are Denmark, United Kingdom, Finland, Malta and Sweden. [4] India ranked last at 180 with a score of 18.9. [5] [6]

Methodology

EPI calculation variables change often as can be seen below. This should be taken into account when observing country performance through several reports, as it can lead to score and ranking changes founded just on methodology modification. Apart from variables addressing environmental health and ecosystem vitality, the calculation also takes into account other variables such as rule of law, control of corruption and government effectiveness. [5]

2020 variables

Objective [7] Issue CategoryIndicator
Environmental health (40%) Air quality (65%)Air pollution - Household Solid Fuels (40%)
Air pollution - Average Exposure to PM2.5 (30%)
Air pollution - PM2.5 Exceedance (30%)
Water Quality (30%) Unsafe Sanitation (50%)
Drinking Water Quality (50%)
Heavy metals (5%) Lead Exposure (100%)
Ecosystem vitality (60%) Biodiversity and habitat (25%) Marine Protected Areas (20%)
Biome Protection (Global) (20%)
Biome Protection (National) (20%)
Species Protection Index (20%)
Representativeness Index (10%)
Species Habitat Index (10%)
Forests (10%) Tree Cover Loss (100%)
Fisheries (10%) Fish Stock Status (50%)
Regional Marine Trophic Index (50%)
Climate and energy (30%)CO2 Emissions (Total) (50%)
CO2 Emissions (Power) (20%)
Methane Emissions (20%)
N2O Emissions (5%)
Black Carbon Emissions (5%)
Air Pollution (10%) SO2 Emissions (50%)
NOX Emissions (50%)
Water resources (10%) Wastewater treatment (100%)
Agriculture (5%)Sustainable Nitrogen management (100%)

2018 variables

The variables in 2018 are largely similar to those from 2016, but have changed in details and some weights. Notably environmental Health is now weighted at 40% and ecosystem vitality at 60%. [8]

ObjectiveIssue CategoryIndicator
Environmental health (40%)Health Impacts (33%)Environmental Risk Exposure (100%)
Air quality (33%)Household Air Quality (30%)
Air pollution - Average Exposure to PM2.5 (30%)
Air pollution - PM2.5 Exceedance (30%)
Air pollution - Average Exposure to NO2 (10%)
Water and sanitation (33%)Unsafe Sanitation (50%)
Drinking Water Quality (50%)
Ecosystem vitality (60%) Water resources (25%) Wastewater treatment (100%)
Agriculture (10%) Nitrogen use efficiency (75%)
Nitrogen balance (25%)
Forests (10%)Change in forest cover (100%)
Fisheries (5%)Fish stocks (100%)
Biodiversity and habitat (25%)Terrestrial Protected Areas (National Biome Weights) (20%)
Terrestrial protected areas (Global Biome Weights) (20%)
Marine protected areas (20%)
Species protection (National) (20%)
Species protection (Global) (20%)
Climate and energy (25%)Trend in carbon intensity (75%)
Trend in CO2 emissions per kWh (25%)

EPI scores

2022

The Environmental Performance Index for the year 2022 ranks 180 countries. [9]

Top 35 countries and score

  1. Flag of Denmark.svg  Denmark 77.9
  2. Flag of the United Kingdom.svg  United Kingdom 77.7
  3. Flag of Finland.svg  Finland 76.5
  4. Flag of Malta.svg  Malta 75.2
  5. Flag of Sweden.svg  Sweden 72.7
  6. Flag of Luxembourg.svg  Luxembourg 72.3
  7. Flag of Slovenia.svg  Slovenia 67.3
  8. Flag of Austria.svg  Austria 66.5
  9. Flag of Switzerland (Pantone).svg   Switzerland 65.9
  10. Flag of Iceland.svg  Iceland 62.8
  11. Flag of the Netherlands.svg  Netherlands 62.6
  12. Flag of France.svg  France 62.5
  13. Flag of Germany.svg  Germany 62.4
  14. Flag of Estonia.svg  Estonia 61.4
  15. Flag of Latvia.svg  Latvia 61.1
  16. Flag of Croatia.svg  Croatia 60.2
  17. Flag of Australia (converted).svg  Australia 60.1
  18. Flag of Slovakia.svg  Slovakia 60
  19. Flag of the Czech Republic.svg  Czech Republic 59.9
  20. Flag of Norway.svg  Norway 59.3
  21. Flag of Belgium (civil).svg  Belgium 58.2
  22. Flag of Cyprus.svg  Cyprus 58
  23. Flag of Italy.svg  Italy 57.7
  24. Flag of Ireland.svg  Ireland 57.4
  25. Flag of Japan.svg  Japan 57.2
  26. Flag of New Zealand.svg  New Zealand 56.7
  27. Flag of Spain.svg  Spain 56.2
  28. Flag of the Bahamas.svg  Bahamas 56.2
  29. Flag of Greece.svg  Greece 56.2
  30. Flag of Romania.svg  Romania 56
  31. Flag of Lithuania.svg  Lithuania 55.9
  32. Flag of Seychelles.svg  Seychelles 55.6
  33. Flag of Hungary.svg  Hungary 55.1
  34. Flag of North Macedonia.svg  North Macedonia 54.3
  35. Flag of Botswana.svg  Botswana 54

Criticisms

The methodology for the EPI has been criticized for its arbitrary choice of metrics which could introduce bias, and its poor performance as an indicator for environmental sustainability. [10] Additional criticisms center on the EPI's lack of specific policy suggestions, and the index's weighting biases against data deficient countries that has led to the overlooking of ecological progress in developing countries. Below is a quote from the abstract:

Jordan spent 2001–2006 in a node represented by lower life expectancy due to particulate matter emissions (PME), but, from 2007 to 2010, the country shifted to a node with a lower PME magnitude—indicating a positive shift in overall environmental sustainability. By following the EPI ranking, the policymakers in Jordan may have assumed that their decisions between 2006 and 2008 led to a deterioration in environmental sustainability, when, in fact, the inconsistent nature of the weighting process involved in the EPI rankings is a likely cause... [10]

In 2022, India was ranked last in the list and rejected the low ranking. As per a statement issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEF&CC), it claimed that several indicators used in the calculation were based on unfounded assumptions and unscientific methods. [11] [12] [13]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human Development Index</span> Composite statistic of life expectancy, education, and income indices

The Human Development Index (HDI) is a statistical composite index of life expectancy, education, and per capita income indicators, which is used to rank countries into four tiers of human development. A country scores a higher level of HDI when the lifespan is higher, the education level is higher, and the gross national income GNI (PPP) per capita is higher. It was developed by Pakistani economist Mahbub ul-Haq and was further used to measure a country's development by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)'s Human Development Report Office.

The green gross domestic product is an index of economic growth with the environmental consequences of that growth factored into a country's conventional GDP. Green GDP monetizes the loss of biodiversity, and accounts for costs caused by climate change. Some environmental experts prefer physical indicators, which may be aggregated to indices such as the "Sustainable Development Index".

EPI or Epi may refer to:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare</span> Economic indicator

The Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW) is an economic indicator intended to replace the gross domestic product (GDP), which is the main macroeconomic indicator of System of National Accounts (SNA). Rather than simply adding together all expenditures like the GDP, consumer spending is balanced by such factors as income distribution and cost associated with pollution and other unsustainable costs. The calculation excludes defence expenditures and considers a wider range of harmful effects of economic growth. It is similar to the genuine progress indicator (GPI).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ease of doing business index</span> Economic indicator

The ease of doing business index was an index created jointly by Simeon Djankov, Michael Klein, and Caralee McLiesh, three leading economists at the World Bank Group, following the release of World Development Report 2002. The academic research for the report was done jointly with professors Edward Glaeser, Oliver Hart, and Andrei Shleifer. Though the first report was authored by Djankov, Klein, and McLiesh, and they continue to be listed as "founders" of the report, some sources attribute the genesis of the idea to Djankov and Gerhard Pohl. Higher rankings indicated better, usually simpler, regulations for businesses and stronger protections of property rights. Empirical research funded by the World Bank to justify their work show that the economic growth effect of improving these regulations is strong. Other researchers find that the distance-to-frontier measure introduced in 2016 after a decision of the World Bank board is not correlated with subsequent economic growth or investment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Global Peace Index</span> Measures the relative position of nations and regions peacefulness

Global Peace Index (GPI) is a report produced by the Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP) which measures the relative position of nations' and regions' peacefulness. The GPI ranks 163 independent states and territories according to their levels of peacefulness. In the past decade, the GPI has presented trends of increased global violence and less peacefulness.

The following are international rankings of Brazil.

The Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy is a joint initiative between the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies and the Yale Law School.

Sustainability metrics and indices are measures of sustainability, and attempt to quantify beyond the generic concept. Though there are disagreements among those from different disciplines, these disciplines and international organizations have each offered measures or indicators of how to measure the concept.

This is a list of key international rankings of Costa Rica

The following are international rankings of Qatar.

The following is a list of international rankings of  Greece.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ibrahim Index of African Governance</span> Annual assessment of African countries

The Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG), established in 2007, provides an assessment of the quality of governance in African countries. The IIAG is compiled by 81 indicators and 265 variables from 54 data projects, coming from 47 independent African and international data sources. Published every two years, the IIAG is one of the world’s most comprehensive collections of data on African governance.

The QS World University Rankings is a portfolio of comparative college and university rankings compiled by Quacquarelli Symonds, a higher education analytics firm. Its first and earliest edition was published in collaboration with Times Higher Education (THE) magazine as Times Higher Education–QS World University Rankings, inaugurated in 2004 to provide an independent source of comparative data about university performance. In 2009, the two organizations parted ways to produce independent university rankings, the QS World University Rankings and THE World University Rankings.

Canada ranks among the highest in international measurements of government transparency, civil liberties, quality of life, economic freedom, education levels, gender equality, public services, public security and environmental sustainability. It ranks among the lowest of the most developed countries for housing affordability, healthcare services and foreign direct investment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Multidimensional Poverty Index</span> Range of poverty indicators

Multidimensional Poverty Indices use a range of indicators to calculate a summary poverty figure for a given population, in which a larger figure indicates a higher level of poverty. This figure considers both the proportion of the population that is deemed poor, and the 'breadth' of poverty experienced by these 'poor' households, following the Alkire & Foster 'counting method'. The method was developed following increased criticism of monetary and consumption based poverty measures, seeking to capture the deprivations in non-monetary factors that contribute towards well-being. While there is a standard set of indicators, dimensions, cutoffs and thresholds used for a 'Global MPI', the method is flexible and there are many examples of poverty studies that modify it to best suit their environment. The methodology has been mainly, but not exclusively, applied to developing countries.

The OECD Better Life Index, created in May 2011 by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, is an initiative pioneering the development of economic indicators which better capture multiple dimensions of economic and social progress.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Climate Change Performance Index</span> Ranking of countries according to climate protection efforts

The Climate Change Performance Index (CCPI) is a scoring system designed by the German environmental and development organisation Germanwatch e.V. to enhance transparency in international climate politics. On the basis of standardised criteria, the index evaluates and compares the climate protection performance of 63 countries and the European Union (EU), which are together responsible for more than 90% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Natural capital accounting is the process of calculating the total stocks and flows of natural resources and services in a given ecosystem or region. Accounting for such goods may occur in physical or monetary terms. This process can subsequently inform government, corporate and consumer decision making as each relates to the use or consumption of natural resources and land, and sustainable behaviour.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">World Happiness Report</span> Publication ranking national happiness based on respondent ratings of their lives

The World Happiness Report is a report by the United Nations that measures national happiness. Data is primarily from the Gallup World Poll and based on respondent ratings of their own lives.

References

  1. "Environmental Performance Index". Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy, and Center for International Earth Science Information Network at Columbia University. Archived from the original on 1 November 2022. Retrieved 16 March 2008.
  2. "2008 Environmental Performance Index Report" (PDF). Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy / Center for International Earth Science Information Network at Columbia University. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 April 2008. Retrieved 18 March 2008. See Executive Summary, pp. 32-35 for a detailed comparison between the ESI 2005, the EPI 2006 and the EPI 2008.
  3. "2016 Global Green Economy Index (GGEI)" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-10-03. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  4. "2022 EPI Results". Environmental Performance Index. Retrieved 9 June 2022.
  5. 1 2 "Explained: What Is The Environmental Performance Index And Why India Has Rejected The Report". IndiaTimes. 8 July 2022.
  6. P'rayan, Albert (23 July 2022). "Why we need climate change education". The Hindu.
  7. "EPI 2020 variables".
  8. "EPI 2018 variables".
  9. "2022 EPI Results". Environmental Performance Index. Retrieved 22 November 2020.
  10. 1 2 Kanmani, Aiyshwariya; Obringer, Renee; Rachunok, Benjamin; Nateghi, Roshanak (11 January 2020). "Assessing Global Environmental Sustainability Via an Unsupervised Clustering Framework". Sustainability. 12 (2): 563. doi: 10.3390/su12020563 . Retrieved 15 May 2021.
  11. Banerjee, Ankush. "What Happened to Green India? Ranked Lowest as per Environmental Performance Index, India Disputes Methodology". Business Insider.
  12. "India's lagging sustainability performance". Hindustan Times. 27 June 2022.
  13. Roy, Esha (11 June 2022). "Explained: What is the environment index, and why has India questioned it?". The Indian Express.