THE APPLICATION OF INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY IN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
IN SLOVAKIA
Milena Moyzeová, Zita Izakoviová
Introduction
Approaches towards the notion of “sustainable development” are currently very widely varied worldwide. This very wide and disjointed understanding of sustainable development causes
problems with its implementation. A further problem is the restricted measurability of sustainable development. Attempts to overcome the problems mentioned above have resulted in establishing
and defining a set of basic scales which are in scientific literature referred to as the indicators of sustainable development. These are defined as specifically designed data, which provide
information on the development of a particular community (in a sustainable or non-sustainable direction), for economic and political areas, as well as for the general public. According to
Rodenburg (1996) indicators are exact statistical measures, comparable in time and space. A whole range of indicators of various hierarchical levels is presented in the scientific literature
(Winograd 1996; Sheng 1996; Nhira 1996; Corson 1996; Izakovi_ová 1996; Finger, Kylcozne 1996; Kozová, et al. 1995, 1996; Agenda 21, 1992; Huba 1997; Ira 1997). The widest set of
indicators is that formulated by the UN Commission for Sustainable Development, which presented and described 132 indicators of sustainable development which can be further sub-divided into
four categories:
- social indicators - 38,
- economic indicators -23,
- environmental indicators - 56,
- institutional indicators -15.
The set of indicators mentioned above can be used on a country level. With regard to the diverse natural and socio-economic conditions in particular countries it is not possible to apply all the
indicators mentioned in each country. For any evaluation it is necessary to select those indicators which are relevant from the point of view of national priorities, objectives, plans, conditions and
problems. This is particularly important with regard to those indicators that reflect those attributes specific to third world countries.
The application of indicators of sustainable development in Slovakia
After the Rio Summit several papers devoted to the problems of sustainability indicators were submitted in Slovakia. The activities of the non-governmental Society for Sustainable Living can
be regarded as the first to proceed in this direction. The Society discussed the relevant questions in their paper Towards Sustainable Slovakia (Huba, et al. 1995). In this paper the developmental
indicators for the energy industry, soil utilisation, water management, the utilisation of woods and forests and raw materials were thoroughly discussed. A set of indicators of sustainable
development applicable in evaluating the environment-related impact of some types of developmental concepts, territorial and planning documentation, and legal provisions and regulations is
defined in a proposed decree executing paragraph 35 of Act N 127/1994 of the Environment Impact Assessment.
The focus of this paper is the delimitation of indicators applicable to the evaluation of the regional development in Slovakia in view of sustainability. From the whole set of possible indicators
basic parameters were chosen, indicating social, economic and environmental conditions of development in individual regions, which are statistically monitored and mutually comparable. Many
indicators, which are impossible to evaluate in the form of numeric data, were evaluated in the form of ballot assessment and verbally defined (from the most favourable to the least favourable
conditions). The overall set of indicators was divided into three basic blocks - environmental, economical and social (social demographic, psychosocial) indicators:
– environmental indicators – specifying regional conditions (soil and water resources and their protection, forest resources, protected landscape, water resources and their protection, raw
materials), as well as the degree of their endangerment and the damage done to them – the endangerment of the landscape and its constituent elements (the degradation of soil resources – both
chemical and physical, air pollution – the production of sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, carbon dioxide, the endangerment of waters – production of effluents, waste – its production, and soil
utilisation – the coefficient of ecological quality in a given space structure),
2
Milena Moyzeová, Zita Izakovi_ová
– economical indicators – although not regarded to be direct indicators of measuring permanently sustainable development, they are very important from the point of view of economical and
developmental elements of a sustainable environment. From economical indicators those, which characterise regional developmental conditions, were selected, namely, the gross domestic product,
investment, foreign capital and the capital invested for the improvement of the environment. A second group of economic indicators is formed by economic parameters with regard to the inhabitants
of a given region, namely, average salary, unemployment rate and the number of vacant positions.
– social-demographic indicators – birth rate, death rate, natural population growth rate, migration, total population growth rate, average life expectancy, age structure,
– psychosocial indicators – marriage rate, divorce rate, abortion rate, violent crime and murder rate.
Apart from the analytical indicators of individual groups we have by means of a synthesis of individual parameters formulated a final evaluation of regions based on the indicators of
sustainable development. By means of combining groups of indicators we have divided the regions into 8 basic categories:
1) regions with favourable environmental and social conditions and unfavourable economic conditions – Stará _ubov_a, Bardejov, Svidník a Vranov nad Top_ou,
2) regions with favourable environmental and unfavourable social and economic conditions – Lu_enec, Ve_ký Krtíš, Komárno,
3) regions with average environmental and economic conditions and favourable social conditions – _adca, Zvolen, Pova_ská Bystrica, Dolný Kubín, Poprad, Humenné, Prešov,
4) regions with average environmental and economic conditions and unfavourable social conditions – Banská Bystrica, Levice, Martin,
5) regions with average environmental conditions and unfavourable social and economic conditions – Nové Zámky, Rimavská Sobota, Ro__ava, Trebišov,
6) regions with unfavourable environmental and social conditions and favourable economic conditions – Bratislava-vicinity, Galanta, _ilina, Tren_ín, Senica, Trnava, Prievidza,
7) regions with average conditions for all three groups of indicators – Topo__any, Nitra, Liptovský Mikuláš, Dunajská Streda, Spišská Nová Ves, Michalovce, Košice-vicinity, _iar nad Hronom,
8) regions with very unfavourable environmental and social conditions and very favourable economic conditions – Bratislava, Košice.
A final evaluation of regions on the basis of sustainable development indicators is on the synthetic map (Fig. 1).
The indicators mentioned above fulfil several functions in regional development:
- they represent tools of regional analysis and synthesis,
- they represent a means of identifying of problems of regional development with regard to sustainability
- they are part of the monitoring and prevention instrument,
- they form the basis for predictions and the formation of recommendations for the solution of the problems mentioned.
Discussion
From the above classification of regions it is possible to determine those factors which, with regard to sustainability, operate as risk factors (Beck 1986; Pašiak 1997).
– The disturbance of socio-economic stability of regional development, manifested as uneven economic development in individual regions and a deepening disproportion of economic development
of individual regions. From the point of view of economic development the situation is favourable in town regions (Bratislava, Košice) and certain districts of Central Slovakia – Banská Bystrica,
Zvolen, and _iar nad Hronom. Conversely, the least favourable situations are in the border regions of southern and northeastern Slovakia – Ve_ký Krtíš, Lu_enec, Stará _ubov_a and Vranov nad
Top_ou. This kind of marked disproportion of economic development originated in the period of socialist industrialisation and centrally planned socialist urbanisation with high concentration of
anthropic activities into selected regions or settlements;
– The disturbance of ecological stability in regions manifested by the marked formation of ecological problems connected with the endangerment of nature and individual natural resources, the
disturbance of the ecological quality of a given space structure and the consequent danger in biodiversity and territorial stability. From this aspect the regions regarded to be the most endangered
are the town regions of Bratislava and Košice and their neighbouring regions, characterised by a large number of ecological problems – a low quality of territorial space structure, a high level of air
and water pollution, soil contamination, vegetation damage, etc. Ecologically problematic are the following regions of Slovakia – Galanta, Košice-vicinity, Prievidza, Senica, Tren_ín, Trnava and
_ilina. Similar to the previous group, the origins of their problems are connected with the high speed development of socialist industrialisation and concentration in selected regions without any
regard to its impact on the environment;
– An increase in risk factors in the social sphere manifested by a marked population digression, caused especially by a decrease in the natural population growth rate as well as by emigration of the
population, especially among younger age groups. The fundamental motivational factor of emigration is the offer of foreign work opportunities and economic conditions (opportunities for higher
salaries, possibilities for professional growth etc.). The decrease in natural population growth rate is first of all a manifestation of national socio-economic changes. From this point of view the most
favourable is the situation in the northern and northeastern regions of Slovakia, while the least favourable is in regions of southern and southwestern Slovakia. From the point of view of sustainable
The Application of Indicators of Sustainability in Regional Development in Slovakia
3
development, the following social risk factors can be mentioned: diseases such as allergies, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, which are the result of the influence of an array of risk factors –
unhealthy lifestyle and diet, stress, environment, insufficient health care standards etc. which are consequently demonstrated in the increase of the total death rate, especially among younger age
groups. Among social environmental risk factors in Slovakia a great increase in psychopathological phenomena must be mentioned – divorce, murder and abortion rates, which greatly endanger the
stability of the social environment. A marked social marginality of the border regions in Slovakia is clearly visible from space differentiation.
From the synthetic influences of regional development the following trends are visible:
- a marked mutual dependence between regional ecological problems and the importance of natural resources. For example, regions with a great amount of quality soil resources are characterised
by considerable problems resulting from the development of agriculture – a low degree of ecological stability, water resource endangerment, caused by chemicals used in agriculture, the
degradation of soil resources, etc.,
– a marked accumulation of social and environmental risk factors in town and city regions type – Košice, Bratislava,
– a concentration of environmental problems in selected regions remnant of socialist industrialisation – the construction of industrial outlets with no regard to their environmental influence – the
_iar region, the Váh region, Central Spiš, etc.,
– a marked socio-economic underdevelopment of border regions especially of southern central and north eastern Slovakia,
– high unemployment rate, shortage of investments, demographic structure damage, high occurrence of psychopathological phenomena, etc.
Conclusion
The regional evaluation presented above is points to the diversity in the development of individual regions and offers basic information about which regions with regard to which indicators
are approaching or not approaching the principles and criteria of sustainable development. Based upon the evaluation presented above it is necessary to work out a range of measures and their
hierarchy for the improvement of individual developmental indicators in view of sustainability.
References
AGENDA 2l, l992: United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Rio de Janeiro (United Nations), A/Conf. l5l/ 4.
BECK, U. 1986: Risikogessellschaft. Auf dem Wege in andere Moderne, Frannkfurt Suhrkamp.
BRUNDTLAND, G. H. 1987: Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
CAREW-REID, et al. 1994: Strategies for National Sustainable Development: A Handbook for their Implementation.
CARING FOR THE WORLD 1990: A Strategy for Sustainability. IUCN/UNEP/WWF, Gland
CARPENTER, R. 1996: Limitations in Measuring Ecosystem Sustainability. In: IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp.175-197.
CHIRAS, D. D. 1993: Ecologic. Teaching the Biological Principles of Sustainability. Amer. Biol. Teacher, 55, 71-76 pp.
COCKLIN, C. R. 1989: Methodological Problems in Evaluation Sustainability. Environm. Conserv. 16, 343-351 pp.
CONNOR, C. O. J. 1996: Toward Environmentally Sustainable Development: Measuring Progress. IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp. 87-114.
CORSON, W. H. 1996: Linking Sustainability Indicators to Performance Goals at National and Subnational Levels. In IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp. 255-264.
DEELSTRA, T. 1996: The European Sustainability Index Project. In IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp. 115-152.
DRDOŠ, J. 1997: In Izakovi_ová, Z., et. al.: Landscape-ecological Condition of Sustainable Development. VEDA Bratislava, 183 pp.
FAL_AN, _., GAJDOŠ, P., PAŠIAK, J. 1995: Social Marginality of Slovakia. S.P.A.C.E., Bratislava, 223 pp.
FINGER, M., KYLCOZNE, JR. 1996: Learning Our Way Out. Indicators of Social Environmental Learning. In: IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp. 239-255.
GOULET, D. 1996: Authentic Development: Is it Sustainable? IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp. 44-59.
GROOT, R. S. 1995: Towards a conceptual framework for measuring ecological sustainability of ecosystems. Report of the workshop Sustainability of ecosystems: ecological and economic factors, Smolenice, pp. 1750.
HUBA, M., et al. 1995: Towards Sustainable Slovakia. STU_/SR, Bratislava, 36 pp.
HUBA, M. 1997: Sustainable Development Indicators with Special Emphasis on the Situation in the U.S.A. Acta Environmentalica UC/Bratislava Supplement, pp. 63-69.
IRA, V. 1997: Social, Demographic, and Health Indicators for Sustainable Development. Acta Environmentalica UC/Bratislava Supplement, pp. 83-88.
4
Milena Moyzeová, Zita Izakovi_ová
IUCN 1973: World Conservation Strategy, Geneve.
IUCN, UNEP, WWF 1980: World Conservation Strategy, Geneve.
IUCN, UNEP, WWF 1991: Caring for the Earth. ÚV SZOPK, Bratislava, 29 pp.
IZAKOVI_OVÁ, Z. 1995: Ecological principles of sustainable development of landscape systems. Report on Sustainability in Slovakia. SNK SCOPE, pp. 23-32.
KOZOVÁ, M., et al. 1995: Methodical handbook to Act 127/1994 - Environmental Impact Assesment. - part I. Ministry of Environment SR, 86 pp.
KOZOVÁ, M., et al. 1995: Methodical handbook to Act 127/1994 - Environmental Impact Assesment. - part II. Ministry of Environment SR, 126 pp.
MOUNRO, D. A. 1996: Rhetoric or Reality. In: A Sustainable World. IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp. 27-35.
NHIRA, C. 1996: Poverty Alleviation and Sustainability. In: IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp. 228-238.
NOVÁ_EK, P., MESERLY, P. et al. 1996: Strategy of Sustainable Development. University Palackého, STU_ Olomouc, 196 pp.
ÓRIORDAN, T. 1988: The Politics of sustainability. In: Turner, R.K. (ed.): Sustainable Environmental Management. Principles and Practice, Belhaven Press, London and Westiew Press, Boulder, pp. 29-50.
PAŠIAK, J. 1997: Sociological Indicators of Sustainable Development. Acta Environmentalica UC/Bratislava Supplement, pp. 89-96.
PIRAGES, D. C., et al. 1977: The Sustainable Society. Praeger, New York, 102 pp.
RIFKIN, J. 1980: Entropy: A New World View. Viking New York, 76 pp.
REDCLIFT, M., et al. 1987: Sustainable Development (Exploring the Contradiction). Methuen, London, New York, 221 pp.
RODENBURG, E. 1996: Monitoring for Sustainability. In: IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp. 77-86.
SHENG, F. 1996: National Economic Indicators and Sustainable Development. In: IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp. 216-228.
SPA_ILOVÁ, R. 1995: Economic Aspects of Sustainable Development. In: SCOPE Committee report on Sustainability in Slovakia, SNC SCOPE, Bratislava, pp. 87-96.
SPAPENS, P., VERWOORDELDONK 1995: Towards Sustainable Europe. A Summary Friends of the Earth Europe. Brussels.
SPRENGERS, S.A., NIENHUIS, P.H., ELIÁŠ, P. 1995: Report of the workshop Sustainability of Ecosystems: Ecological and Economic Factors, Smolenice, 170 pp.
TRZYNA, T. 1996: A Sustainable World. IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, 99 pp.
VIEDERMAN, S. 1996: What Do We Need to Know? IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp.36-44.
WINOGRAD, M. 1996: Environmental Indicators for Latin America and the Caribbean: Tools for Sustainability. In: IUCN, I.C.E.P.P. California, pp.198-215.
People – Environment Relations as a Research Topic in Social Sciences in Slovakia
Figure 1.
5