Download Proposal on synthetic air pollution pressure indicators

Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
Session C-Pa 6b
Proposal on Synthetic Air Pollution Pressure
Indicators
Casilda LASSO DE LA VEGA
Ana Marta URRUTIA
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
Proposal on Synthetic Air Pollution Pressure Indicators
Casilda LASSO DE LA VEGA1
Faculy of Economics, Basque Country University
Av. Lehendakari Aguirre 83
48015 Bilbao, Spain
T. + 34 9 460 13 688 F. + 34 9 460 17 028
[email protected]
Ana Marta URRUTIA
Faculy of Economics, Basque Country University
Av. Lehendakari Aguirre 83
48015 Bilbao, Spain
T. + 34 9 460 13 694 F. + 34 9 460 17 028
[email protected]
ABSTRACT
Proposal on Synthetic Air Pollution Pressure Indicators
The environment is changing under the influence of human activity. There are now evident
signs of imbalance in the situation of the air, water and soil. In economic and social matters many
indicators exist, but in most countries and indeed internationally there is an evident lack of
environmental indicators.
The purpose of this study is to develop environmental pressure indicators which can provide
measurements on an international level of impact in terms of climate change, increased ozone
levels in the troposphere and acidification, taking particular account of the pollutant emissions
which directly or indirectly influence these problems. An indicator is also proposed which shows
the overall pressure in terms of air pollution. The levels of these indicators are worked out for some
industrialised countries for 1990-97, results are presented and changes over that period are
studied.
The indicators proposed are not intended to replace the wealth of initial information, but
rather to supplement the information provided by existing environmental and economic indicators.
They are intended as an aid in decision-making in matters of environmental protection and
improvement, and in monitoring environmental factors in terms of sustainable development.
RESUME
Proposition concernant les indicateurs de pression de la pollution synthétique de l’air
L’environnement change sous l’influence de l’activité humaine. Aujourd’hui, on trouve des
signes évidents de déséquilibre dans la situation de l’air, de l’eau et du sol. En affaires
économiques et sociales, il existe de nombreux indicateurs mais dans la plupart des pays et dans le
1
This research has been supported by U.P.V.-E.H.U., under the project UPV.036.321-HA138/99.
2
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
monde entier en fait, il y a un manque évident d’indicateurs écologiques.
Le but de cette étude est de développer des indicateurs de pression écologiques pouvant
fournir des mesures à un niveau international de l’impact en termes de changement climatique,
d’augmentation du niveau d’ozone dans la troposphère et d’acidification, en tenant
particulièrement compte des émissions polluantes qui influencent directement ou indirectement ces
problèmes. Un indicateur est aussi proposé et montre la pression globale en termes de pollution de
l’air. Le niveau de ces indicateurs est analysé pour certains pays industrialisés pour la période
1990-97, les résultats sont présentés et les changements au cours de cette période sont étudiés.
Les indicateurs proposés n’ont pas pour but de remplacer la richesse des informations
initiales, mais plutôt de compléter les informations fournies par les indicateurs écologiques et
économiques existants. Ils sont considérés comme un moyen permettant de prendre des décisions en
matière de protection et d’amélioration de l’environnement et de surveiller des facteurs écologiques
en termes de développement durable
1. The Need for Environmental Air Pollution Pressure Indicators
The environment is changing under the influence of human activity. There are now evident
signs of imbalance in the situation of the air, water and soil. In some countries, major efforts have
been made to compile data on the environmental situation, and a great deal of information is now
available concerning the complex matter of the changes in and effects on the environment caused
by human activity. But for all the information available, there is still a need for a measuring system
which can sum up the situation of the environment in just a few indicators. In economic and social
matters many indicators exist, but in most countries there is an evident lack of environmental
indicators which could illustrate trends, measure the suitability of particular actions in certain areas
and encourage public awareness of environmental problems.
All environmental indicators should provide information on the status of the environment and
reflect changes over time in a comprehensible, reproducible manner. Whenever possible they
should be worked out in the same terms as the political objectives and goals to which they are
linked.
A widely used framework for environmental indicators arises from a simple set of questions:
What is happening to the state of the environment or natural resources? Why is it happening? What
are we doing about it? Indicators of changes or trends in the physical or biological state of the
natural world, state indicators, answer the first question, indicators of stresses or pressures from
human activities that cause environmental change, pressure indicators, answer the second, and
measures of the policy adopted in response to environmental problems, response indicators, answer
the third.
Within this framework of pressure, state and response indicators, pressure indicators measure
the effectiveness of measures carried out, i.e. whether emissions increase or decrease and whether
the adverse conditions to which human beings are exposed get better or worse. They are not
therefore used only to measure the pressure which each country exerts on the environment, but also
to set specific targets for improvement.
This study looks at the problem of climate change, the increase of ozone in the troposphere
and acidification. These are three of the four problems (the fourth being the reduction of ozone in
the stratosphere) directly linked to air pollution on the list of the 12 major environmental problems
highlighted by the European Environment Agency in the Dobris Report as being of special
relevance to Europe.
On the basis of the air pollutant emissions associated with each of these problems, synthetic
indicators are developed which measure the pressure exerted by each problem. An indicator is also
proposed which shows the overall pressure in terms of air pollution. The levels of these indicators
are worked out for some industrialised countries for 1990-97, results are presented and changes
3
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
over that period are studied.
A permanent source of conflict for environmental indicators is that they must collect more
and more information on a complex situation and present it in a manageable number of parameters
suited to decision-making and public information processes.
The fact that they present a synthesis means that the indicators drawn up can only be rough
approximations. But it is also clear that there needs to be one measurement, albeit on the same level
of roughness as many economic indicators such as the GDP, which although it is only a number
represents a measurement which brings home environmental points which have hitherto not been
widely considered, and which provides some overall knowledge.
The synthetic indicators proposed here can be used to check the efficacy of policies
implemented. The possibility is also left open of incorporating into the study the goals set at the
various summits in terms of reducing pollutant emissions: the synthetic indicators devised could be
used to measure how far each country is from achieving these goals. They are not intended to
replace the wealth of initial information, but rather to supplement the information provided by
existing economic indicators. They can be combined with other indicators of human development to
draw up indicators of sustainable development, and can help increase interest in environmental
variables by reflecting them in a more effective, more global manner.
2. Devising Synthetic Pressure Indicators to Assess Different Air Pollution Problems
In this section we draw up synthetic pressure indicators based on emissions of pollutant gases
directly or indirectly associated with the problems mentioned above, with a view to assessing and
classifying countries in terms of the pressure exerted on the environment by air pollution in relation
to climate change. We also devise a synthetic indicator for overall air pollution pressure, and relate
all indicators to population figures.
There is no way to measure the pressure exerted in each of these problems directly. It can
however be estimated from pollutant emissions linked to each problem. Thus, to estimate the
pressure related to climate change in each country the reference taken is the level of emission of
greenhouse gases, i.e. carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O).
For tropospheric ozone the emissions considered are those of nitrogen oxides (NOx), non
methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOC), methane (CH4) and carbon monoxide (CO) for
each country. The emissions considered in regard to acidification are those of sulphur dioxide
(SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and ammonia (NH3).
2.1 Synthetic Climate Change Pressure Indicator
The contribution of greenhouse gases to global warming depends on their atmospheric
concentration, their residence time in the atmosphere and their effectiveness in trapping radiation.
To compare the impact of different gases the global warming potential (GWP) relative to CO2 is
often used, with CO2 having a value of 1. GWP values are strongly dependent on the time horizon
considered. Examples of GWP values over a 100-year period are 21 for CH4, 310 for N2O and
several thousand for a number of halogenated compounds (IPCC 1996). The units for emissions
taking into account GWP values are called "CO2 equivalents".
These units have been adopted by the international community to assess the impact of these
gases on potential global warming. Taking these GWP values as a reference, the synthetic climate
change indicator (CCI) considered for each country is the sum of emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O,
measured in millions of tonnes of "CO2 equivalents", i.e.:
(1)
CCI = ( 1 * CO2 ) + ( 21 * CH4 ) + ( 310 * N2O )
4
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
2.2 Synthetic Pressure Indicators for Increases in Tropospheric Ozone and Acidification
As in the previous subsection, we consider here how to weight the emissions of each gas
responsible for part of the tropospheric ozone, and each gas which contributes to acidification.
Unlike the case of climate change, in these two cases there are many factors apart from emissions
which do not arise from human activity which directly affect potential increases in tropospheric
ozone and acidification. Many of these factors depend on geographical location, e.g. sunlight, wind
and rain. It is not therefore possible to establish internationally the weight of each emission in each
problem under consideration. Nevertheless, in an international context there is a need for indicators
to compare the pressure exerted by each country on the atmosphere in regard to these problems. But
a pressure indicator which is defined differently in each country is of little use, so it is important not
to give up the idea of obtaining synthetic indicators which can provide a mechanism for
international comparisons and assessments over time of the pressure exerted by each country in
terms of air pollution.
With this in mind, the relationship between the different emissions affecting each problem in
the increase of tropospheric ozone and in acidification was investigated for the period from 1990 to
19972. In all cases the correlations between emissions were observed to be high.
The high levels of correlation between emissions of NMVOC, CO, NOx and CH4, which are
the precursors of tropospheric ozone, indicate that there is a relationship between the different
emissions: there are countries where emission levels are high and countries where they are low. In
other words there are some countries which exert great pressure in terms of increasing ozone levels
in the troposphere and others which exert less. This must obviously be reflected in any pressure
indicator devised in regard to tropospheric ozone. The same applies to measurements of pressure in
regard to acidification.
In the absence of any better criterion by which to set the weights allocated to the different
emissions in the pressure indicators for each of the problems considered, it was decided that the
indicator which provided most information on initial emissions should be taken.
In this context, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is a statistical method which enables
large amounts of information with a set of linearly related variables to be reflected in a small
number of factors. In all cases and for all the years from 1990 to 1997 this method was found to be
appropriate: it resulted in high levels of correlation between emissions, a determinant close to 0 for
the respective correlation matrices and good results for other sample suitability measurements.
In terms of the emissions responsible for the increase in ozone levels in the troposphere, the
first factor of PCA explains over 99% of the information for 1991, '92, '93, '95, '96 and '97, 93& for
1990 and 95% for 1994. For emissions related to acidification the first factor of PCA explains
around 88% of the initial information.
The percentage of information included in a single factor for each problem is very high in all
cases, which means that a single indicator can be used to represent a very large amount of the initial
emission information.
This method has the advantage of providing linear indicators which give a great deal of the
information in the initial data but depend on the specific data to which the analysis is applied, so
that the resulting factors do not allow comparisons to be made over time. Keeping in mind the goal
of devising indicators which will allow international comparisons and assessment over time, our
studies of the coefficients of the first factors obtained for the various analyses run lead us to propose
the following synthetic indicators, which we have called TOI (tropospheric ozone indicator) and
ACI (acidification indicator) respectively:
(2)
2
TOI = ( 90 * NMVOC ) + ( 20 * CO ) + ( 80 * NOx ) + ( 50 * CH4 )
Data from the United Nations Framework on Climate Change (2000) and European Environment Agency (2000).
5
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
(3)
ACI = ( 100 * SO2 ) + ( 150 * NOx ) + ( 450 * NH3 )
Emissions of all the gases involved are incorporated in calculating the respective indicators,
measured in millions of tonnes.
The synthetic indicators proposed are pressure indicators which enable the pollutant emissions
associated with the problems to be assessed over time. Little information is lost in terms of the
initial emission data: the percentages of variability explained by these synthetic indicators for all the
years considered differ by less than one point from those explained by the factors obtained by PCA.
This slight information loss seems clearly worthwhile when set against the possibility of making
comparisons over time.
The correlation between the factors obtained by PCA and by the synthetic indicators proposed
for each problem (TOI and ACI) calculated for each pair of indicators is 1.000. We can therefore
state that the synthetic indicators and the respective factors are statistically indistinguishable at a
significance level of 99%.
2.3 Synthetic Pressure Indicators for Assessing Overall Air Pollution
Once synthetic indicators are devised which allow climate change, the increase in
tropospheric ozone and acidification to be evaluated, the possibility is opened up of devising a
single overall air pollution pressure indicator. This would mean that each country could be
represented by a single number indicating the pressure exerted in terms of air pollution as a result of
the problems mentioned above. The linear indicator which reflects the highest proportion of the
information in the initial data is always the first factor obtained after PCA so, after a check to
ensure that the assumptions of sample suitability for this method are met for all the years involved,
this same method was applied to the synthetic indicators proposed above in regard to the
calculations made for 1990-1997.
The variance explained by the first factor of PCA is over 96% for every year involved. This
figure is high enough to suggest that a single factor can validly be used to reflect a very high
proportion of the information in the synthetic indicators CCI, TOI and ACI, and that the factors
obtained by PCA can be considered as pressure indicators for overall air pollution in all these years.
In order to draw up a single indicator which will enable assessments to be made over time, the
coefficients of the first factor obtained for each year from 1990 to 1997 were studied. The average
of the figures for CCI, TOI and ACI is proposed as this single pressure indicator for air pollution.
This indicator is referred to here as PI.
(4)
PI = ( CCI + TOI + ACI ) / 3
The percentages of variability explained by this synthetic indicator for the period between 190
and 1997 differ by less than one point from those explained by the factors obtained via PCA, and
their correlation with those factors is 1.000 in all cases. We can therefore state that the synthetic
indicators and the pollution factors obtained via PCA are statistically indistinguishable at a
significance level of 99%.
The figures for synthetic indicators CCI, TOI, ACI and PI for 1997 and 1990 are presented in
Table1, which also shows the rates of change for each figure from 1990 to 19973.
2.4 Synthetic Indicators for Per Capita Pressure in Regard to Air Pollution
The data used to calculate all these synthetic indicators are the overall emission figures for
3
Data from the United Nations Framework on Climate Change (2000) and European Environment Agency (2000).
6
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
each country. These can be broken down according to different criteria, e.g. population, GDP or
surface area of the country of reference. The criterion considered here is population. It is logical that
countries with more inhabitants should have higher levels of pollutant emissions. To relate the data
to population figures4 per capita synthetic indicators were drawn up for overall pollution, climate
change, tropospheric ozone and acidification by simply dividing the relevant indicator in each case
by the population of the country involved, expressed in millions of persons. Per capita indicators for
1997 and 1990 are presented in Table 2, which also shows the rates of change from 1990 to 1997.
4
Data from the World Bank.
7
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
Table 1. Synthetic Indicators for Air Pollution and Rates of Change
for Some Industrialised Countries
1997
COUNTRIE
S
Australi
a
Austri
a
Belgiu
m
Bulgari
a
Canad
aCzech
Rep.
Denmar
k
Estoni
a
Finlan
d
France
German
yGreec
eHungar
y
Icelan
d
Irelan
d
Italy
Japan
Latvia
Lithuani
a
Luxembour
g
Netherland
sNew
Zealand
Norwa
y
Poland
Portuga
l
Romani
a
Russian
Fed.
Slovak
Rep.
Sloveni
a
Spain
Swede
n
Switzerlan
d
Ukrain
eUnit.
Kingdom
U.S.A
.
Mean
PI
73.8
126.9
121.4
144.1
81.1
22.1
66.3
619.2
785.7
128.5
98.6
5.3
75.3
597.4
CCI
444.3
77.6
151.9
84.5
674.7
157.8
83.5
23.1
76.2
550.3
1035.8
110.7
79.1
2.7
59.7
542.3
Synthetic
indicators
TOI
962.4
78.7
111.2
74.8
831.7
104.5
65.9
11.6
58.5
657.4
612.6
116.3
87.0
5.0
71.5
645.2
1280.4 481.0
19.1 16.0 22.6
34.6
8.0 10.2
6.5
175.1 232.1 145.1
75.4 127.2
60.9 53.7 81.0
447.4 426.2 366.8
112.0 72.6 121.4
195.8 164.0 184.9
2111.4 1597.0
53.0 55.1 42.7
425.7
79.5
50.6
601.9
1990
ACI
PI
65.3
117.8
204.9
80.6
126.8
188.1
170.0
94.0
31.7
64.3
649.9
708.9
158.6
129.6
8.2
94.5
235.4
87.4
35.5
73.1
677.2
1163.4
121.3
132.9
9.6
74.4
604.9
CCI
410.8
73.7
138.9
123.4
590.6
189.8
71.7
40.7
72.5
553.6
1201.1
103.8
86.6
2.6
56.9
609.7 532.9
1175.0
39.7 35.7
63.2 51.5
10.0 13.4
198.2 208.3
71.9
58.0 47.1
459.0
103.8 68.4
270.4 229.1
2998.8
83.8 72.5
26.5 19.2
420.5 301.4
88.9 69.5
60.0 53.7
919.2
809.8 726.6
5903.0
18.8
32.0
7.3
148.2
48.0
549.3
142.0
238.5
61.2
32.6
325.5 407.1 544.4
69.3 91.5 77.7
51.7 46.9 53.3
466.5
657.4 560.3 588.2
6513.9 6314.0
199.0 507.1 458.3 201.6
TOI
1125.5
95.7
111.2
117.6
147.4
75.3
17.4
60.2
795.6
1009.9
109.6
101.5
5.1
74.5
Growth
rate %
1990ACI PI CCI
1997TOI ACI
8 -14
72.4 -8 5 -18 -10
130.5 0 9 0 -10
323.2 -35 -32 -36 -37
14
369.1 -39 -17 -29 -54
115.4 -7 17 -13 -19
48.5 -38 -43 -33 -35
86.8 -9 5 -3 -26
682.6 -9 -1 -17 -5
1279.1 -32 -14 -39 -45
150.5 6 7 6 5
210.5 -26 -9 -14 -38
21.0 -45 5 -2 -61
91.8 1 5 -4 3
630.8 665.5 -2 2 2
475.6
9 1
37.8 45.7 -52 -55 -40
54.5 83.7
-37
8.3
8.1 -20 -24 -23
177.4 208.9 -12 11 -18
124.0
5 3
78.6 48.4 5 14 3
601.8
-7
110.5 132.5 8 6 10
234.1 348.0 -28 -28 -21
2270.1
-30 -30
62.9 116.0 -37 -24 -32
20.7 39.5
397.9 562.0 1 8 2
111.7 85.6 -11 0 -18
64.7 61.6 -16 -4 -28
-49
776.8 925.9 -26 -10 -28
6520.4
10 -3
216.6 504.9 500.1 268.4 -12
8
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
-5
-9
-59
-62
-10
-29
-1
-9
7
-31
-47
-18
-3
-9
-13
-36
-5 -25
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
Table 2. Per capita synthetic indicators for air pollution and rates of change
for some industrialised countries.
Per capita synthetic indicators
1997
Growth rate
1990
%
1990-1997
COUNTRIES
PI
Australia
CCI
TOI
24.3
52.6
ACI
PI
CCI
TOI
24.1
66.0
ACI
PI CCI TOI ACI
1
-20
Austria
9.1
9.6
9.7
8.1
10.4
9.5
12.4
9.4
-13
0
-22
-14
Belgium
12.6
15.0
11.0
11.7
12.7
13.9
11.2
13.1
-1
8
-1
-11
Bulgaria
14.4
10.1
8.9
24.4
21.6
14.2
13.5
37.1
-33
-29
-34
-34
22.3
27.5
-16
-29
-54
Canada
21.2
5
Czech Rep.
14.0
15.3
10.1
16.5
22.7
18.3
14.2
35.6
-38
Denmark
15.3
15.8
12.4
17.7
17.0
13.9
14.6
22.5
-10
13
-15
-21
Estonia
15.8
16.5
8.3
22.6
22.6
25.9
11.1
30.8
-30
-36
-25
-27
Finland
13.0
14.9
11.5
12.6
14.7
14.5
12.1
17.4
-11
3
-5
-28
France
10.6
9.4
11.2
11.1
11.9
9.8
14.0
12.0
-11
-4
-20
-8
9.6
12.6
7.5
8.6
14.6
15.1
12.7
16.1
-35
-17
-41
-46
12.1
10.4
11.0
15.0
11.9
10.2
10.8
14.8
2
2
2
1
Hungary
9.7
7.8
8.5
12.7
12.8
8.4
9.8
20.3
-25
-7
-13
-37
Iceland
17.7
9.0
16.7
27.3
37.5
10.1
20.1
82.4
-53
-11
-17
-67
Ireland
20.3
16.1
19.3
25.5
21.2
16.2
21.3
26.2
-4
0
-9
-2
Italy
10.4
9.4
11.2
10.5
10.8
9.4
11.1
11.7
-3
1
1
-10
10.2
3.8
9.5
3.8
7
-1
6.4
9.1
7.5
14.8
13.3
14.1
17.0
-52
-36
-56
9.3
8.6
16.9
13.8
14.6
22.4
-36
-61
Germany
Greece
Japan
Latvia
7.7
Lithuania
-48
Luxembourg
19.9
25.6
16.1
18.1
26.1
35.2
21.8
21.2
-24
-27
-26
-15
Netherlands
11.2
14.9
9.3
9.5
13.3
13.9
11.9
14.0
-15
7
-22
-32
19.8
33.5
21.4
36.9
-7
-9
11.1
18.5
10
-1
New Zealand
Norway
13.8
12.2
18.4
10.9
Poland
11.6
11.0
9.5
14.2
Portugal
11.3
7.3
12.3
14.3
10.5
Romania
8.7
10.6
11.7
Russian Fed.
Slovak Rep.
9.8
7.3
8.2
14.3
10.8
10.2
7.9
Slovenia
Spain
13.7
12.0
11.4
1
15.8
-9
-4
-10
6.9
11.2
13.4
8
6
10
7
15.0
-25
-26
-19
-29
-29
-29
-26
-34
9.9
10.1
20.2
15.3
11.3
15.9
13.7
11.9
21.9
16.3
13.3
9.6
10.4
19.8
-38
-48
-18
10.7
8.2
10.3
13.7
10.8
7.8
10.2
14.5
-1
6
0
-5
Sweden
8.9
7.8
10.3
8.7
10.4
8.1
13.1
10.0
-14
-4
-21
-13
Switzerland
6.9
7.1
6.4
7.3
8.9
8.0
9.6
9.2
-22
-12
-33
-20
10.3
11.2
9.6
10.1
14.1
12.6
13.5
16.1
-27
-11
-29
-37
24.0
23.2
23.7
26.1
1
-11
14.8
13.9
15.8
16.1
-6
-14
Ukraine
Unit. Kingdom
9.1
U.S.A.
Mean
10.7
17.7
11.5
13.5
9
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
-48
15.8
-21
-27
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
3. Situation of Some Industrialised Countries in Regard to Air Pollution Pressure in 1997
This section uses the figures calculated for the synthetic indicators proposed above (PI, CCI,
TOI and ACI) for 1997 and 1990 as presented in Table 1, and the per capita indicators in Table 2 in
a analysis comparing various industrialised countries in regard to overall air pollution pressure.
Biplot graphs are then given showing the indicators for 1997. These graphs show the
countries for which data are available for all the indicators calculated.
Figure1 shows the various countries with their PI, CCI, TOI and ACI. This figure reflects
over 99% of the information on CCI, TOI and ACI. The points represent countries and the arrows
represent the indicators. The correlation between TOI and ACI is 1.000. All the indicators are
strongly correlated.
5
Germany
Rotated factor2 (43,7%)
4
3
2
United Kingdom
1
Netherlands
CCI
PI
TOI/ACI
Belgium
Poland
0
Sweden Romania
Luxembourg Portugal
Italy
France
Spain
-1
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Rotated factor1 (55,4%)
Figure 1. Biplot of Some Industrialised Countries and Synthetic Indicators for ressure in Regard
to Air Contamination
A large group of countries is observed, including Iceland, Luxembourg, Estonia, Latvia,
Switzerland, Sweden, Portugal and The Netherlands, whose pollution pressure indicator is lower
than average. The opposite is true of Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Poland and
Spain. Distinctions can also be drawn among the members of the latter group. The case of Germany
is particularly noteworthy, as its climate change pressure indicator is far higher than for the other
countries.
Figure 2 shows the countries with the per capita figures for PI, CCI, TOI and ACI. This figure
covers over 83% of the information on the per capita figures of CCI, TOI and ACI. Once again the
points represent the countries and the arrows the indicators. The correlation between per capital
figures of TOI and ACI is high, but that of CCI is low.
The way in which countries are grouped for per capita figures is very different from the
previous figure. The countries which stand out clearly in terms of per capita figures are Ireland,
10
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
Luxembourg and Iceland. Iceland and Ireland stand out for their high per capita pressure indicators
for acidification, while Luxembourg stands out for its per capita pressure indicator for climate
change. They are followed by Estonia, Denmark, Bulgaria and the Czech Republic.
4
Luxembourg
Rotated factor 2 (34,7%)
3
2
Netherlands
Belgium CCI Denmark
1
Germany
TOI
United Kingdom
0
Austria
Switzerland
-1
Latvia
Ireland
PI
ACI
France Greece
Sweden
Bulgaria
Hungary
Portugal
Iceland
-2
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
Rotated factor 1 (48,8%)
Figure 2. Biplot of Some Industrialised Countries and Synthetic Indicators for Per Capita
Pressure in Regard to Aair Contamination
The lowest per capita figures for pressure in regard to pollution are those of Switzerland,
Latvia, Romania, Sweden, Austria, Germany and Hungary. It is noteworthy that all the countries
which in absolute terms pollute most, i.e. Germany, France, United Kingdom, Italy, Poland and
Spain, are below average in terms of per capita figures.
7000
2500
U.S.A.
6000
2000
5000
Russian Fed
1500
TOI
TOI
4000
3000
2000
1000
Australia
Canada
1000
France
United KingdomGermany
Russian Fed.
500
Poland
Spain
New Zealand
Netherlands
Luxembourg
0
Australia
Germany
Spain
Japan
0
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0
CCI
500
Japan
1000
1500
2000
2500
CCI
Figure 3. SomeIindustrialised Countries Shown According to the Synthetic Indicator for
Pressure in Regard to Climate Change and Tropospheric Ozone
11
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, the Russian Federation and the U.S.A. are not
included in the figures given above as no data are available on their NH3 emissions, and the
acidification pressure indicator cannot be worked out. The figures below show the situation of these
countries for those indicators which can be calculated, i.e. CCI and TOI. Figure 3 gives overall
indicators and Figure 4 per capita figures.
As shown by Figure 3, in absolute terms the highest figures are those of the U.S.A., followed
by the Russian Federation. Canada and Japan are higher than average for both indicators, as are
Germany, Italy, France and United Kingdom. New Zealand is well below the average for both
indicators.
60
Australia
50
40
TOIpc
New Zealand
30
Canada
U.S.A.
20
Iceland
Norway
Ireland
Luxembourg
Portugal France
Latvia
Germany Estonia
Switzerland
Japan
10
0
0
10
20
30
CCIpc
Figure 4. Some Industrialised Ccountries Shown According to the Synthetic Indicator for Per
Capita Pressure in Regard to Climate Change and Tropospheric Ozone
In per capita terms the picture is very different: the highest figures are those of Australia, New
Zealand, Canada and the U.S.A.. Japan and Russian Federation are below average for both
indicators.
4. Changes in Air Pollution Pressure in Some Industrialised Countries between 1990 and 1997
To analyse the changes in the environmental pressure in terms of air pollution exerted by
these countries in recent years, we studied the rates of change in the synthetic pressure indicators
for pollution, climate change, tropospheric ozone levels and acidification over the period from 1990
to 1997. The first point to be made is that the trend was downward in most countries, so that a
considerable drop in the pressure exerted by each country in regard to the various pollution
problems is observed. Exceptions to this trend are the U.S.A., Canada, Japan, New Zealand,
Portugal, Greece and Norway.
As shown by Figure 5, those countries which have undergone the biggest drop in pressure in
regard to overall pollution since 1990 are mostly Eastern European countries and members of the
Community of Independent States, though Iceland, Germany, the United Kingdom and
Luxembourg have all experienced drops of over 20%. Increases in the overall pollution indicator
12
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
are observed in Portugal, Greece, Norway, Spain and Ireland. The 30% drop in climate change and
tropospheric ozone pressure indicators in the Russian Federation is particularly noteworthy.
Taking all the countries shown as a whole, the overall pressure on the environment in regard
to pollution is down by 12%. Pressure in regard to acidification is down by 25%, while the drop for
climate change and tropospheric ozone levels is only 5%.
1400
20
1200
10
0
1000
-10
800
-20
600
-30
400
-40
-50
0
-60
La
t
v
Ic ia
e
Cz la
ec nd
h
Re
Es p.
t
Sl
ov onia
ak
R
Bu ep.
lg
G aria
er
m
Ro any
m
an
U Hu ia
ni
t. nga
K
i ry
Lu ngd
xe om
m
Sw bou
itz rg
N erla
et
he nd
rla
n
Sw ds
ed
e
Fi n
nl
an
Fr d
an
c
A e
us
D tria
en
m
ar
k
Ita
Be ly
lg
iu
m
Ire
la
nd
Sp
a
N in
or
w
a
G y
re
e
Po ce
rtu
ga
l
200
PI97
PI90
Growth rate
Figure 5. Rate of Change in the Synthetic Indicator for Air Pollution for Some Industrialised
Countries
These results for the different countries are maintained when emissions are considered in
relation to their populations, as shown by the rates of change in the synthetic indicators for per
capita pressure presented in Table 2.
5. Conclusions
This study has looked at emissions of pollutant gases associated with the problems of climate
change, increases in tropospheric ozone levels and acidification with a view to devising synthetic
pressure indicators for each of these problems, and a synthetic indicator reflecting the overall
pressure on the environment in terms of air pollution. These indicators allow comparisons to be
made between the pressure exerted on the air by different countries, and enable changes over time
to be analysed so that these indicators can be used to check the efficacy of policies implemented.
The possibility is also left open of incorporating into the study the goals set at the various summits
in terms of reducing pollutant emissions: the synthetic indicators devised could be used to measure
how far each country is from achieving these goals.
It is hoped that these indicators can supplement the information provided by existing
environmental and economic indicators. They are intended as an aid in decision-making in matters
of environmental protection and improvement, and in monitoring environmental factors in terms of
sustainable development.
13
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000
Statistique, Développement et Droits de l‘Homme
REFERENCES
European Environment Agency. (1995). Medio Ambiente en Europa: El Informe Dobris. Ministerio
de Medio Ambiente. Madrid
European Environment Agency. (1998). Europe's Environment: The Second Assessment. Office for
Official Publications of the European Communities. Luxembourg.
European Environment Agency. (2000). Website: http: //www.eea.int.eu. Internet.
Eurostat, European Commission, The European Environment Agency, United Nations, O.E.C.D.,
World Health Organization. (1995). Europe's Environment: Statistical Compendium for the Dobris
Assessment. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Luxembourg.
Eurostat, European Commission, The European Environment Agency. (1998). Europe's
Environment: Statistical Compendium for the Second Assessment. Office for Official Publications
of the European Communities. Luxembourg.
Hammond, A. Adriaanse, A. Rodenburg, E. Bryant, D. Woodward, R. (1995). Environmental
Indicators. World Resources Institute. Washington, D.C.
IPCC (1996). Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change, Contribution of Working
Group I to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Eds:
J. T. Houghton, L. G. Meira Filho, B. A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg and K. Maskell.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
United Nations Framework on Climate Change (2000). Website: http://www.unfccc.de/resources/.
Internet.
14
Montreux, 4. – 8. 9. 2000