indicators for sustainable development in israel - second phase. 2009

8/7/2019 Indicators for Sustainable Development in Israel - Second Phase. 2009

1/21

Editors

Moti Kaplan, Amir Eidelman, Galit Cohen

Jerusalem

2009

Indicators for SustainableDevelopment in Israel

Second Phase

The Environmental Policy Center Policy and Planning Division


2/21


3/21

Steering Committee

Valerie Brachya , Ministry o Environmental Protection

Pnina Zadka , Central Bureau o Statistics

Pro. Eran Feitelson , Hebrew University o Jerusalem

Project CoordinationGalit Hazan, Jerusalem Institute or Israel Studies

Writing o the Document

Moti Kaplan Regional and Environmental

PlanningArch. Naama Ringel

Shira Buckwald

Rebecca WolpeNirit Vitman

Liora Hami-Cohen

Sarit Caspi-Oron

Edith Molot

Central Bureau o StatisticsIdit Gajst

Amit Yagur-Kroll

Dr. Moshe Yanai

Roee Abudi

Pareto Engineering Ltd.Dr. Doron Lavee

Sadan-Lowenthal, ConsultantsRuth Lowenthal

Transport Today and TomorrowDr. Karl Martens

Avital Shechter

Jerusalem Institute or Israel StudiesMichal Korach

Scientic Advice

Dr. Yeshayahu Bar-Or, Chie Scientist, Ministry o

Environmental Protection

Dr. Amos Bein, Hydrology

Dr. Meir Ben Zvi, Hydrology

Pro. Arza Churchman, Environmental Psychology

Ran Haklai, Economics

Ziona Haklai, Health

Gideon Hashimshoni, Transport

Dr. Jean Koch, Air Quality

Einat Meged, Transport

Arch. Dina Rachevsky, Planning

Dr. Emanuel Sharon, Economics

Pro. Uri Shamir, Water Quality

Pro. Ilan Solomon, Transport

Michael Zaide, Water Quality

Language Editing

Ronit Rahav

Ella Omer

Printing and ProductionPublication and Inormation Division, Ministry o

Environmental Protection

Design and Typesetting

Rami and Jaki Studio

Translation to English

Shoshana Gabbay

The document is available at:

www.sviva.gov.il

www.jiis.org.il

www.cbs.gov.il

Copyrights belong to the Ministry o Environmental

Protection, the Central Bureau o Statistics and the

Jerusalem Israel or Israel Studies.

Parts o this document may be cited and copied orresearch, educational and policy purposes, provided

ull credit is given to the source.


4/21


5/21

1. Introduction

Sustainable development policy in Israel aims to

respond to the development needs o a progressive,

modern and egalitarian society, while preserving vital

spatial and environmental resources.

The policy is designed to accommodate a growing

population and a continuous rise in standard o living,

while wisely and eciently utilizing the country's

resources and assuring opportunities and services

to the weakest population groups; to allocate space

or development and building while conserving

land resources, especially high quality and sensitive

ones; to meet the annual demand or water while

preserving the quality o dierent water sources and

assuring their quantity and continuation or uture

generations; and to meet the needs o industry,

transport and energy production while maintaining

air quality or the pleasure and health o the generalpopulation.

Indicators are expected to help assess the

environmental implications o development trends

and to test whether they advance or contradict

sustainable development policy. Indicators also help

to check whether development takes into account

the scarcity and vulnerability o environmental

resources and uses them cautiously and prudently, or

needlessly depletes them. One o the main aims o the

indicators is to set "red lights" in those areas in which

discerned trends substantially contradict sustainabledevelopment principles. The role o indicators is to

guide human actions so that most o the resources

remain or present and uture generations and to

assure well-being and ample opportunities to the

general public, including the weaker sectors o the

population.

The process o ormulating sustainable development

indicators in Israel began with discussions about

the nature o such indicators, their compilation

rom dierent sources and their appropriateness to

conditions in Israel. A range o experts rom dierentdisciplines participated in the discussions and

reviewed development trends and indicators that

would be most suitable or depicting trends in Israel.

A report entitled "Sustainable Development Indicators

in Israel, Summary Report Phase I " rst proposed a

series o indicators, some o which were based on

international sources ollowing adaptation to Israel's

needs, and some o which were developed rom the

outset to respond to Israel's unique conditions.

Although Israel resembles developed Western

countries, it nevertheless diers rom them in

term o its dimensions, physical conditions, rate

o development and way o lie. The accelerated

development which the country has witnessed over

the past 60 years is essentially unmatched in Western

countries. Israel's population grew more than tenold

rom the time the state was rst established, and

massive development was needed to respond to

such accelerated growth in terms o built-up area,

industry, inrastructure development and utilization oscarce land and water sources.

Alongside the emphasis placed on environmental

aspects and the need to leave resources or uture

generations, indicators were also chosen to reveal

social and economic trends. Concern or the weaker

sectors o the population and prevention o poverty

and economic deterioration are signicant directions

in achieving sustainable development and are

represented by a specic series o indicators.

The current document presents ten indicators which

are based on the rst phase report. These indicators

were selected to represent the groups established in

Agenda 21 in the social, environmental and economic

realms, with the exception o the institutional realm.

The rst two phases o the project represent the

beginning o an extended process o ormulating a

comprehensive, dynamic and up to date system o

indicators. This system will serve as a tool or policy

makers, government bodies and the environmental

administration in monitoring the success and

eectiveness o trends in achieving sustainable

development.

I. BACKGROUND

5


6/21

2. Indicators or SustainableDevelopment in Western Countries

Indicators or sustainable development are signs

which help to reveal development trends and show

to what extent they correspond to or contradict the

advancement o sustainable development.Indicators examine pressures on environmental

resources and their causes and help indicate

possibilities or reducing these pressures eciently.

They are designed in such a way as to present the

current state and trends o change in relation to long

term targets. In this way, they serve as more than

a monitoring measure but also as a tool or policy

ormulation by decision makers.

Indicator systems or sustainable development have

been developed throughout the world, each with

its own emphasis. Following is a summary o somerepresentative indicator systems.

2.1. Environmental Indicator System or

the European Union Countries EEAThe European Environment Agency (EEA) is a

scientic body ounded to monitor environmental

trends in Europe. This agency produces, among

others, comprehensive reports once every ve years,

beginning with 1994. The reports survey subjects

related to policy setting in European countries as a

whole and monitor the implementation o EuropeanUnion (EU) guidelines. The EEA report denes priority

areas or monitoring: climate change, nature and

biodiversity, environment, health and quality o lie,

natural resources and waste.

Trends in EU states ocus on the ollowing subjects:

Environmental aspects o consumption patterns

and steps to restrain over-consumption.

Scope and manner o use o global resources, not

only local consumption.

Depletion o the earth's natural capital anddamage to natural systems.

Review o dispersed pollution sources and their

mitigation.

Conronting natural and man-made hazards in

natural systems.

A comparison between European states was made

on the basis o 37 environmental indicators. The

description o each indicator begins with a relevant

policy question and continues by speciying

the context o decision making in each area

(environmental legislation, environmental decisions,

etc.). A comparison between the states is then

presented in relation to target achievement in nine

main environmental areas, including: greenhouse gas

emissions, energy consumption, renewable energy, air

pollution, ozone depletion, reight transport demand,

organic agriculture, municipal waste and greywater

use. Based on the ndings and on the analysis o the

indicators, eight areas which call or a change in policy

were identied: reducing household consumption,

EU expansion, abating biodiversity loss, promoting

sustainable use and management o natural resources,

integrated policy, increased ocus on climate change,

greater attention to the global environment and

increased emphasis on the link between environment

and health.

The report also denes the desirable targets or the

next report and the progress achieved in meeting

the targets in relation to environmental conventions,

oremost among which is the Kyoto Protocol.

2.2. Indicator Development in the OECD

FrameworkAccording to the Organization or Economic

Cooperation and Development (OECD), environmental

indicators on their own are not eective in reducing

the driving orces responsible or environmental

deterioration. The basic assumption is that human

activity puts pressure on the environment and that

this pressure may harm environmental, economicand social systems. Thereore, policy should relate to

human activities and respond to these changes.

In order to identiy trends in dierent areas, a system

o indicators was dened to check driving orces and

indicate areas in which intervention could bring about

a change in undesirable trends.

Within this ramework three categories were dened

pressure, state and response (PSR).

Pressure Indicators to identiy environmental

and human responses to the pressure created.

State Indicators to identiy processes which

create undesirable environmental impacts.

Response Indicators to examine changes in the

state o the environment in light o implemented

policy and measures.

Five sets o indicators were dened, each integrated

within the other. Each set o indicators corresponds

to a specic goal and audience. The ollowing table

presents the ve sets o indicators, their unction,

target audience and goal:

6


7/21

Key

Indicators

Core Indicators Sectoral

Indicators

Indicators

Derived rom

Environmental

Accounting

Decoupling

Environmental

Indicators

Function in

the System

Inorming the

public

Tracking

environmental

progress

Promoting integration Monitoring

progress toward

sustainable

development

Target

Audience

Public and

high ranking

decision

makers

Governments

and

environmental

decision makers

Governments and decision makers in dierent sectors

Features and

Scope

Used or

international

comparison

Used or decision making on the national and sectoral levels

Key Indicatorsa. include a limited set o

indicators vital or identiying the main environmental

trends. This set is composed o ten indicators related

to pollution and natural resources and assets:

Issues relating to pollution include climate

change, ozone layer, air quality, waste recycling

and water quality. The ve corresponding

indicators are: carbon dioxide emissions,

consumption o ozone depleting substances,

emissions o nitrogen and sulur compounds,

waste recycling in local authorities and extent o

wastewater treatment.

Issues relating to natural resources and assets

include water resources, orest resources, shing

resources, energy resources and biodiversity. The

ve corresponding indicators are: intensity o

water resource use, intensity o orest resource

use, intensity o shing resource use, intensity o

energy use and endangered species.

Each o these indicators constitutes a subsystem o

several indicators which deal with the same issue.

Thus, or example, the indicator or carbon dioxide

emissions is made up o emissions per capita,

emissions per gross domestic product and rate o

change in emissions since 1980.

Core Indicatorsb. include the key indicators

plus additional environmental indicators. This group

represents a wider range o environmental subjects

which relate to most o the member states in the

organization. However, this set only includes some40-50 indicators. Climate change, or example,

is represented in the key indicator category by

the indicator o carbon dioxide emissions. In the

core indicators, climate change includes several

indicators which are categorized according to the

PSR ramework. The indicator used to measure the

pressure on the environment which causes climate

change is greenhouse gases emissions, which is

composed o emissions o CO2, CH

4, N

2O, PFC, HFC

and SF6. The indicators used to measure the state o

the environment in relation to climate change aregreenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere

and the global means temperature. The indicator used

to measure response relating to climate change is

eciency o energy use which is composed o the rate

o energy use and economic and scal instruments.

Sectoral Indicatorsc. give expression to the

interdisciplinary aspect o sustainable development.

This set o indicators is the only one to measure

aspects which go beyond environmental aspects

and to examine the links between them and the

environment.

7


8/21

Environmental Accounting Indicatorsd.

utilize physical natural resource accounts as well as

environmental expenditure accounts.

Decoupling Environmental Indicatorse.

measure the decoupling o the long-term link

between economic progress and exploitation and

deterioration o environmental resources. Theseindicators examine this decoupling on the macro level

and the sector level.

Initially, the OECD environmental indicators were

only perceived as a system or environmental review,

but economic and social indicators were eventually

added. Attempts were also made to examine the links

between justice, poverty and environmental state,

on the one hand, and consumption patterns and

unsustainable production, on the other hand.

OECD Environmental Outlook: Forecast or

2020 on the Basis o the Indicators

OECD was the rst organization to develop a system

o indicators or sustainable development. In 2001, the

organization published a orecast on the state o the

environment in developed countries or 2020. Based

on the indicators, this orecast was meant to discernsectors in which improvement was needed and to

dene ways in which to eect such improvement.

The indicator-based environmental outlook was

divided into three levels which are graphically

represented by trac light signals: A green light

signies the possibility o "proceeding cautiously";

a yellow light signies that urther review is needed

to assess the trends and their signicance and to

establish environmental policy; and a red light

signies a negative state which calls or changing the

discerned trends and taking urgent action.

Signals o the OECD Environmental Outlook

Green Light Yellow Light Red Light

Pressures on theEnvironment

Industrial point sourcepollution

Some air pollutants

Water use

Toxic emissions romindustry

Hazardous wastegeneration

Energy production anduse

Agricultural pollution

Over-shing

Greenhouse gas

emissionsMotor vehicle andaviation air pollutionemissions

Municipal wastegeneration

State o theEnvironment

Forest coverage Surace water quality

Forest quality

Ozone layer integrity

Biodiversity

Tropical orest coverage

Fish stocks

Groundwater quality

Urban air quality

Climate change

Chemicals in theenvironment

Societal Response "Green" purchasing

"Green" agriculture

Protected areas

Resource eciency

Energy eciency

Biotechnology

Forest plantations

Aquaculture

Energy and transporttechnologies

Waste management

8


9/21

2.3. Developing Indicators in the UNCSD:

Division into Four Areas

Corresponding to Agenda 21The UN Commission or Sustainable Development

(UNCSD) was established in the atermath o the 1992

Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. In 1995 it called or

developing a system o indicators in our areas denedin Agenda 21: economy, society, environment and

institutional organization.

The work plan o the UNCSD included three dierent

stages. In the rst stage, a list o 134 indicators was

ormulated which were characterized by the Driving

Force-State-Response (DSR) ramework, which

improves on the PSR ramework. The PSR method was

originally developed by the OECD when the concept

o sustainable development was still in its inancy

and largely ocused on environmental indicators. In

the improved ramework, D, which stands or drivingorce, substitutes or P, which denotes environmental

pressure. This change refects the wider reerence

to the economic and social aspects o sustainable

development. In the second stage, 22 countries were

chosen as pilots or testing the indicators. In the third

stage, in light o the pilot's lessons, a nal list o 58

indicators was ormulated in 2001. While constituting

an improvement over the rst list, these indicators

cannot be implemented in every state. Adaptation

and ormulation o dierent or complementary

indicators is needed or dierent countries.Despite the limitations and disadvantages o the

UNCSD indicator system, it constitutes the most

widespread basis or discussion and review o

sustainable development indicators in the world

today.

Indicator Development or Mediterranean

States UNEP-MAP Blue PlanThe indicator system o the Blue Plan specically

relates to Mediterranean coastal countries. The Blue

Plan ormulated a list o 130 indicators divided intosix sectoral rameworks which are derived rom the

guidelines o Agenda 21: population and society,

territory and human settlement, economic activity

and sustainability, environmental quality, sustainable

development - players and policy, and cooperation in

the Mediterranean region. The indicators are based

on the PSR ramework. Their innovation lies in their

classication according to an additional section, the

geographical scale regional, national, coastal and

site location. For example, indicators on marine and

coastal issues are classied according to the ollowing

spatial scale:

National Levela.

Indicator number 32: Coastal erosion

Defnition:The length o a given coastal strip

undergoing erosion, whether manmade or natural,

expressed as a percentage o the total coastal strip.

Methodological description: Erosion is a natural

phenomenon which occurs to dierent degreesin some Mediterranean coasts. The main causes o

this phenomenon are seawater, wave intensity and

marine currents. The eect changes according to the

eatures o the coast (rocky or sandy). As a result o

this erosion, the coastal line recedes, with the most

severe maniestation in river estuaries. Calculation o

the indicator depends on available sources in each

country and on means o identiying coastal line

changes.

Coastal Area Levelb.

Indicator 33: Protected coastal area

Defnition:The total o protected areas in a specic

year, which include coastal ecosystems (continental

and marine).

Methodological description: National legislation

exists in all countries regarding the protection

o natural heritage. For the sake o comparison,

protected areas are listed under categories dened

by the International Union or Conservation o

Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN). IUCN denes

six categories o protected areas in two groups: ully

protected areas natural reserves, national parks

and natural monuments; partially protected areas

habitats, protected land and marine landscapes and

protected resource management zones.

Out o all o these areas, the total protected areas

in the country which include a coastal segment are

totaled.

In addition to these 130 indicators, the Blue Plan also

developed a more limited system o 34 indicators to

monitor sustainable development progress in the

Mediterranean region, within the ramework o theMediterranean Strategy or Sustainable Development.

The strategy responds to our targets (parallel to the

distribution o indicators in the CSD: economy, society,

environment and institutional) and is composed

o seven sectors (water, energy, transport, tourism,

agriculture, urban development and coastal areas).

9


10/21

2.4. Aggregative Index (ESI)This index refects a totality o actors and their

interrelationships which impact on sustainable

development. The index enables a comparison

between countries and their ranking in relation to

one another. The disadvantage o this index lies in

the diculty to develop a single indicator which

accurately refects a complex state. An example o

such an aggregative index is the Environmental

Sustainability Index o the World Economic Forum. In

2005, the ESI ranked Israel in the 62nd place among

146 nations, with a score o 50.9, due to the intense

pressures on land and water. In comparison, Finland

was ranked rst with a score o 75.1 and North Korea

last with a score o 29.2.

3. Development o Indicators in Israel

3.1. Indicator SelectionIn the current phase, indicators are presented as a rststep in the process o ormulating a comprehensive

system o indicators or sustainable development in

Israel. The indicators were ormulated on the basis o

a proposal included in the rst phase o this project,

based on available data in the Central Bureau o

Statistics.

Indicator selection was based on a comprehensive

review o studies carried out in dierent rameworks

and according to the ollowing considerations:

Recommendations o the rst stage o theproject which were based on thematic

background papers.

Existence o an available and reliable database

or the analysis o the indicator.

Correspondence to the Blue Plan indicators.

Indicators recommended within the ramework

o a committee to review Israel's sustainable

development strategy.

The indicators were classied according to six subjects

established or the UNCSD system: economic growth,

level o social and environmental equity in the present

generation, capacity to cope with environmental

issues, protection o the interests o uture

generations, eciency o natural resource utilization

and quality o lie o the present generation.

3.2. Methodology or Indicator AnalysisThe indicators in this report encompass a wide

range o subjects which represent dierent areas o

sustainable development. The dierences and variety

o the indicators call or standardization o the process

or two primary reasons:

Ability to compare between the indicators andobjectively track trends in each area.

Establishment o a basis or comparison between

indicator systems in Israel and worldwide

Each o the indicators is described in detail

according to the ollowing sections:

Nature o the IndicatorA short introduction including a description o the

indicator, the ways in which it will identiy changes in

direction and trends, the indications or these changes

and the signicance o the indicator or sustainable

development.

DatabaseDenition: Denition o the basic concepts and terms

related to the data used or indicator analysis.

Data Source: A reliable and timely source o data is

a prerequisite and basis or an indicator system. For

the most part, the data sources in this project are

data compiled and produced by the Central Bureau

o Statistics (CBS). These data encompass dierentsubjects and some are provided to the CBS by external

sources (Hydrological Service, JNF-KKL and others).

In a ew cases, when CBS data were missing, other

sources were used.

Collection and Calculation Method: Specication,

as ar as possible, o collection methods, sampling

methods and data processing and analysis.

Data Limitations: Extent o compatibility o

the measured data with the description o the

phenomenon, limitations in assembling the samples,

errors in sampling and data collection, inconsistentand irregular data collection, limited time period or

data collection, etc. weaken the link between the

collected data and the examined phenomenon.

10


11/21

Indicator AnalysisDiscernible Trends:The results were presented as a

time series, based on the availability o the data over

the years. This allowed or a depiction o the changes

and trends in the specic area over time.

Reasons and Explanations or the Trends: This

section seeks to explain the changes which occurredin a specic area. When man-made, these changes are

meant to indicate the link or the infuence between

human activity and the trend.

Sustainable DevelopmentLink between the indicator and sustainable

development:This section relates to the indicators

according to their classication into environmental,

economic and social groups.

In the environmental realm, the link between the

trends and the environmental phenomena is sought:is it stable, improved, deteriorating?

In the economic realm, the results indicate the

economic level o individuals in society and the

economic growth in given time periods.

In the social realm, the ocus is on identiying

well-being and quality o lie, inequality and gaps,

especially where costs would be imposed on the

weaker sectors o society and where benets would

be reaped by a small group.

Data limitations related to sustainabledevelopment: Indicators generally reveal a specic

direction which refects the general trend in a dened

subject. However, since sustainable development

encompasses wide-ranging activities and conditions,

which are all interrelated, identiying a specic trend

may well indicate a direction in this specic realm but

not a general direction. This is the main weakness o

the indicator system. Thereore, a more systematic

vision based on the observation o a series o

indicators is needed in order to gain a comprehensive

view. This section ocuses and species the limitations

in each subject.

Linkage to other indicatorsOne indicator is requently insucient to describe a

trend, even in a single and dened subject. Several

indicators, covering dierent aspects or parts o a

certain subject, are necessary in order to understand

the trend. This section species the additional

indicators which are needed to complete the general

picture in a specic subject.

Recommendations or improving the

indicator and urthering its developmentOn the basis o the results, a series o

recommendations was dened, whether on the

urther development o the specic indicator or

analysis o additional indicators necessary to complete

the picture. Where possible, recommendations were

also made on processes to change the trend.

4. Continuation o the ProcessIndicators were dened which are unique to the

conditions o the country and refect its specic

problems and needs. Thus, or example, an indicator

which depicts trends on open space in Israel, a

country characterized by land scarcity, is o upmost

importance. On the other hand, this indicator would

be o low importance in land-rich and sparsely

populated countries. Similarly, indicators which

monitor basic conditions o well-being such as accessto drinking water and health services would be o

high importance in the Third World but o lesser

importance in wealthy countries in which the entire

population enjoys such services.

A major consideration in the rst phase o this project

was the need to develop a methodology or an

indicator system which is adapted to Israel's unique

needs, both because o the lack o databases and

due to the inappropriateness o some international

indicators rom the Israeli perspective.

Attention should now be ocused on preparing a

long range plan or the development o an indicator

system which would refect Israel's unique conditions.

Israel's economy is likely to continue to grow over

the next decades. Increased development pressures,

depletion o land and water resources and damage

to biodiversity present the risk o irreversible

deterioration, at the expense o uture generations.

This report recommends that completion o

the databases or the indicators which describe

environmental deterioration in all areas should be a

top priority in the development o an indicator system

or sustainable development in Israel.

11


12/21

1. Gross Domestic Product

Gross domestic product (GDP) is dened as the

total market value o all nal goods and services

produced in a given period o time beore subtracting

depreciation o capital stock and including net

value added tax. GDP includes three components:expenditure or private and public consumption,

gross investment (private and public) and net

export o goods and services. GDP is an indication

o the size o the economy, but in order to check the

economic well-being o residents, GDP is divided

by the total population to get an average value o

GDP per capita. GDP per capita is generally used as a

basis or comparison o standard o living in dierent

economies.

An analysis o GDP per capita in Israel between

the years 1950 to 2005 shows an almost constant

increase, with some periods o decline, largely due

to social and political actors on the national and

international levels. High GDP per capital is one o

the basic conditions or sustainable development and

constitutes an indicator o the personal economiclevel o individuals in society. However, while GDP

per capita is a principal indicator o the capacity o

an economy to manage processes o sustainable

development, it does not identiy processes which

contradict sustainable development principles.

Additional environmental and social indicators

would be needed to complement the ndings o this

indicator. Alternatively, a green accounting system,

such as the System o Environmental and Economic

Accounts (SEEA) could be developed.

II. INDICATORS

FOR SUSTAINABLE

DEVELOPMENT IN ISRAEL

Figure 1: GDP per capita in Israel between 1950-2006

Source: Central Bureau o Statistics

90,000

80,000

70,000

60,000

50,000

40,000

30,000

20,000

10,000

0

1950

1952

1954

1956

1958

1960

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

Calculation method until 1994 Calculation method since 1995

12

GDPpercapitainshekels

Year


13/21

2. Ratio o External Debt to GDP

The external debt to GDP ratio refects the net debts

o the economy, including current and accumulated

debts, less assets. A growth in external debt signies

that the economy consumes more than it produces

and needs external sources. The external debt/GDPratio indicates an economy's ability to service its

external debt and pay it back and also refects the

economy's risk level.

In Israel the external debt to GDP ratio declined until

1961 and then increased until 1985. It grew rom

only 10% in the late 1960s to 56% in 1984. The ratio

declined somewhat to a level o 50% in 1991 and then

gradually increased. In 2004, the ratio reached a new

peak o 62%.

In general, a higher ratio between external debt

and GDP contradicts the principles o sustainable

development. This is especially true when the

debt is used or present consumption. However, i

external debt is increased to help und development

and investments, the sustainable development

implications are not so clear-cut. Investments inthe present will also serve uture generations,

even with the added debt. At the same time, the

investments themselves should be analyzed, with the

understanding that long-term investments would be

the ones to benet uture generations.

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

Figure 2: Ratio o External Debt to GDP


13

Rateoexterna

ldebttoGDP(%)

Year


14/21

3. Expenditure on Food out of the TotalIncome of Households (by Deciles)

This indicator largely refects intragenerational

equity and provides a partial picture o the gaps

between dierent population groups. A household

which expends most o its income on ood will haveless income to purchase goods and services such as

education, culture and health. This may create a cycle

o poverty which prevents equal opportunities or

uture generations as well.

In 2003, the rate o ood expenditure out o a

household's total income in the lowest decile was

52%, in the th decile 21% and in the top decile

11%. Analysis o the changes in the rate o ood

expenditure between 1992/93 and 2002/3 shows

an average 20% reduction in ood expenditure, with

higher expenditure in the lower decile. Trends reveal a

growing gap in the rate o ood expenditure between

the lower and higher deciles, testiying to the growth

in income gaps and inequities between the deciles.

These trends contradict one o the main goals o

sustainable development - reducing intragenerational

inequity.

Figure 3: Rate o Expenditure on Food out o the Total Income by Income Deciles

in the Years 1992/93, 2003

1992/93 2003


Figure 4: Disposable Income ater Deducting Expenditure on Food or the Household,

by Income Deciles, 2003


14

5,000

0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1,345

2,8663,655

4,5665,738

7,2828,608

9,878

12,368

18,711

10,000

15,000

20,000

50

40

30

20

10

0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

47

52

37 37

3330 31

2427

2123

1923

1720

1517

1412 11

(Highest)

Rateoexpenditureon

oodoutototalinc

ome

(Lowest)

Decile

Disposablehousholdincome

(NIS)

(Highest)(Lowest)

Decile


15/21

4. Motorization Rate Number oVehicles or 1,000 Inhabitants

The motorization rate is dened as the number o

passenger cars per 1,000 inhabitants and is a common

indicator in international comparisons o economic

development and environmental issues. A highmotorization rate corresponds with a high level o

economic development and quality o lie. On the

other hand, increased numbers o cars are a burden

on the environment associated with extensive use

o energy sources, local and global air pollution, and

development o road networks which encroach on

public space and ragment natural habitats.

Between 1951 and 2004, Israel's motorization rate

increased rom 6 vehicles to 228 vehicles per 1,000

residents. A 300% increase was noted between 1960

and 1969 and a 111% increase between 1970 and

1979.

In terms o sustainable development, a high

motorization rate is associated with air pollution

in urban areas which is accompanied by extensive

energy use, noise, urban heat island eect and roadcongestion as well as loss o open space as a result

o road inrastructure development. The growth o

suburbanization is also associated with increased

use o private cars because o the inability o public

transportation to service suburban residents. The

success o a sustainable policy will largely be

measured by its ability to divert a share o kilometers

traveled in private vehicles to public transportation so

as to diminish the burden on the environment.

Figure 5: Motorization Rate in Israel between 1950-2004

0

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

1950

1952

1954

1956

1958

1960

1962

1964

1966

1968

50

100

150

200

250


15

No.ovehic

lesper1,0

00inhabitants

Year


16/21

5. Car Ownership Levelsby Income Deciles

The level o car ownership per income decile is an

additional indicator o intragenerational inequity.

Dierences in car ownership levels refect not only

dierences in economic status but also dierences inaccess to opportunities and vital destinations.

Car ownership levels in Israel dier substantially

between income deciles. In 1986/7, only 8% o all

households in the lowest income decile owned a

car compared to 78% in the highest income decile.

The rate o car ownership increased among all

income deciles in the 1990s and early 2000s, with

higher growth rates in the lower income deciles,

which reduced this inequity. In 2003, 20% o the

households in the lowest income decile owned a car

in comparison to 90% in the highest income decile.

Gap reduction in car ownership levels in the various

income deciles is compatible with one o the main

goals o sustainable development intragenerational

equity since it increases equal opportunity and

provides access to all areas o lie: employment, trade,residence, open space and more. However, increased

car ownership and use also increase pressures on the

environment. The orecast is or car ownership rates

in the lower income deciles to rise and inequity to be

reduced. This trend necessitates parallel activities to

promote the use o public transportation and restrain,

as much as possible, the use o private cars, largely

through improved availability and reliability o public

transport.

Figure 6: Rate o Car Ownership by Deciles in Israel, in percentages, in 1986/87 and 2003

50

40

30

20

10

01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

100

90

80

70

60

1986/87 2003

20

8

14

33

24

36

30

46

38

54

44

54

57

73

63

73 74

83

78

90


16

Rateocarownership

(Highest)(Lowest)

Decile


17/21

6. Lie Expectancy at Birth

Lie expectancy at birth, dened as the average

number o years that a person is expected to live, is

an indicator or public health. It is also an accepted

indirect indicator or the population's standard

o living and its awareness o health promotion.

In developed societies, the constant rise in lie

expectancy is the result o a decline in inant mortality,

reduction in inectious diseases and signicant

reduction in degenerative diseases.

In 2003, lie expectancy or women in Israel reached

81.9 years (compared to 73.4 years in 1971) and

or men 77.7 years (compared to 70.1 in 1971). Lie

expectancy in Israel has increased steadily among

both sexes, maintaining and even slightly expanding

the gap between the sexes. One o the main

consequences o the growth in lie expectancy is an

increase in the adult population, which may be more

exposed to chronic diseases and disability.

Sustainable health ocuses both on the prevention odisease in the uture and on the promotion o health

or the individual and society in the present. This

approach complies with the target o "Health or All"

which was declared by the World Health Organization

in 1986. It emphasizes prolonging lie, improving

health, increasing people's control over their health

and achieving equity in health and health services.

Figure 8: Inant Mortality in Israel, Rate per 1,000 Live Births, 1971-2003


Figure 7: Lie Expectancy by Sex and Diference in 1971-2003


Women Men Diference

17

40

20

0

100

80

60

1970

2

1

0

5

4

3

1975 1974 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Lieexpectancyinyears

Year

20

10

0

30

1971 1975 1979 1983 1991 1995 1999 20031987Rateoinantmortalityper1,0

00

livebirths

Year

Diferenceinyears


18/21

7. Energy Consumption

Energy is the driving orce o the economic

production system in every modern economy. A rise

in energy consumption is an indicator o economic

development and growth. However, increased energy

consumption also has a negative external eect.

It is associated with environmental deterioration,

including greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution

and natural resources depletion. The major challenge

o sustainable development is to enable economic

growth through gains in energy eciency, by means

o such measures as conservation.

Primary energy supply in Israel rose rom 5,000

thousand tons o oil equivalent (TOE) in 1970 to

20,000 in 2004, an annual increase o 4.16%. During

the same period Israel's population grew rom 3

million to 6.9 million an average annual increase

o 2.48%. Thus the average increase in energy

consumption per capita rose rom 1.7 TOE in 1970 to 3

TOE in 2004, an average annual rise o 2%.

Energy consumption is associated with increased

use o non-renewable materials which diminish the

natural resources available to uture generations.It also creates byproducts with negative external

impacts air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions

that threaten to damage the quality o lie o uture

generations. Increased energy use is responsible

or a rise in energy prices and is unequally divided

among the dierent segments o the population. In

addition energy consumption which is based on ossil

uels increases Israel's dependence on imports and

increases the national external debt, thus imposing an

economic burden on uture generations.


Figure 9: Primary Energy Supply in Israel in 1970-2004

Figure 10 : Energy Consumption per Capita in Israel in 1970-2004


18

Year

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

0

Tonso

OilEquivalent(thousands)

1.5

1.7

1.9

2.1

2.3

2.5

2.7

2.9

3.1

3.3

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

Year

TonoOilEquivalent


19/21

8. CO2

Emissions

Scientists have linked global warming and climate

change to an increase in greenhouse gases in the

atmosphere, and especially to an increase in carbon

dioxide (CO2) concentrations. Global warming is now

considered to be the primary environmental hazard,

with impacts on both the economy and society. This

indicator measures the level o CO2

emissions per

capita in Israel.

Total emissions o CO2in Israel in 2003 were 63, 729

tons, a 4% rise compared to 2000 and a 23% increase

rom 1996. Emissions rom uel combustion account

or 97% o the total emissions. CO2

emissions per

capita in Israel in the years 1996, 2000 and 2003 were

9.12, 9.7 and 9.53 tons respectively. These statistics

demonstrate a rise o 6% rom 1996 to 2000 and a

decline o 2% rom 2000 to 2003. A sharp increase

in CO2

emissions was recorded in Israel in recent

decades, which has been moderated since 1997. A

similar trend characterized emissions per capita, with

a moderate decline since 1999, reaching about 10 tons

per capita in 2004.

While Israel's contribution to total global emissions

is small, its emissions per capita rank it relatively

high among many developed Western countries.On the assumption that Israel's economic growth

will continue in coming years, under a business as

usual scenario, energy demand will concomitantly

rise bringing in its wake increases in CO2

emissions.

This rise will continue as long as Israel uses ossil

uels or energy production and transportation. A

switch to natural gas use or electricity production

and transportation, along with renewable energy

development, energy eciency and conservation,

may moderate or even reverse the trend o increasing

levels o CO2

emissions per capita.

Figure 11: CO2

Emissions rom Fuel Combustion Total and per Capita Emissions

Source: Central Bureau o Statistics and Air Quality Division, Ministry o Environmental Protection

19

1980

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

80,000

70,000

60,000

50,000

40,000

30,000

20,000

10,000

01984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004

Emissions per capita Total emissions

Tonspercapita

Year

Tons


20/21

9. Open Space per District

Open spaces include natural, landscape and heritage

values and serve as green lungs and recreation and

leisure areas or Israel's population. Development

pressures have reduced the quantity and quality o

open spaces in Israel.

In the ve year period between1998-2003, the largest

area o open space was detracted rom the three

districts which are characterized by the widest open

expanses in Israel: the Central, Northern and Southern

Districts. In the remaining districts, Haia, Tel Aviv and

Jerusalem (which are more metropolitan in character),

the open space area converted to built-up area was

relatively limited. The largest area o open space to be

converted to built-up space was in the Central District

due to growing demand or building and the growth

o suburbanization processes in the vicinity o the Tel

Aviv metropolitan area.

A decrease in the scope o open space threatens

ecosystems, environmental health and the public's

right to enjoy natural, landscape and heritage assets.

Figure 12: Scope o Open Space (Dunam) Converted to Built Area in Each District

between 1998-2003

Figure 13: Percent o Open Space Converted to Built Space out o the Total District Area

between 1998-2003

Source: Moti Kaplan Regional and Environmental Planning

Source: Moti Kaplan Regional and Environmental Planning

20

2,000

0

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

North Haia Center Tel Aviv Jerusalem South

Districts o Ministry o Interior

Area(

dunam)

Scope o open space converted to built space

0.2%

0%

0.4%

0.6%

0.8%

1.0%

1.2%

1.4%

0.24%

0.48%

1.15%

0.85%

0.37%

0.05%

0.24%

North Haifa Center Tel Aviv Jerusalem South Total

Districts o Ministry o Interior

Percentototalarea

odistrict

Percent o open space converted to built space


21/21

10. Salinity o Groundwaterin the Coastal Aquierand Mountain Aquier

Salinity o groundwater indicates the quality o

groundwater and reveals the state o Israel's main

groundwater reservoirs. The indicator providesinormation about these water resources and their

changes over time as a unction o water resource

management including pumping, inltration to

groundwater and land use above aquiers.

There is no clear trend o change in water salinity

in the mountain aquier and average chloride

concentrations range between 130-164 mg/l. In the

coastal aquier a clear trend o increased salinity has

been recorded, with an average increase o 2 mg/l a

year, rom 112 mg/l in 1957 to 198 mg/l in 2005.

Water salinity increases due to the lowering o

water levels and reduction o drainage to sea, the

inltration o water which is more saline than the

natural replenishment water, the use o ertilizersand pollutant accumulation in the soil and the range

o activities which recycle water and bring about

the increased salinity o irrigation waters and salt

accumulation in the soil. Salinity, thereore, reduces

the volume o renewable water which is at the

disposal o the population and damages sensitive

agricultural crops.

Figure 14: Salinity o the Coastal Aquier and the Mountain Aquier, 1957-2005

1955 1 960 1 965 1970 1980 1985 1990 20001975

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

20051995

Source: Israel Water Authority

21

Salinity(mgcl/l)

Year

Trend line, Coastal aquierCoastal aquierMountain aquier

indicators for sustainable development in israel - second phase. 2009

Documents