ThinkProgress Logo

Climate Progress

Measuring Human And Environmental Progress: World Leaders Call For New Metrics At Rio+20

By Stephen Lacey on Jun 20, 2012 at 8:36 pm

World leaders are calling for new ways of measuring progress on sustainability at Rio+20

Gross Domestic Product is the crack-cocaine of economic indicators. It’s a simple concept, it’s easy for politicians and the media to recite, and it fits in perfectly with society’s single-minded obsession with growth — no matter what the consequences.

It’s time to stop that addiction, say world leaders.

“GDP has always had its limitations. Progress needs to be defined in a way which accounts for the broader picture of human development,” said Helen Clark, administrator of the UN Development Program, speaking at a side event at the Rio+20 summit today.

She was joined by a group of heavy hitters, including Denmark’s Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt, Zambia’s President Michael Chilufya Sata, former OECD Chief Statistician Enrico Giovannini, and World Bank Environment Program Head Mary Barton-Dock — all of whom called for an end to our overreliance on GDP.

GDP simply measures the volume of economic activity in a given economy. The higher the GDP, supposedly the higher the quality of life. But because it equally values all economic activity — good, bad, and disastrous — it’s a woefully inadequate tool for gauging human and environmental progress.

In 1968, Robert Kennedy made one of the most famous and oft-quoted statements on the limitations of the metric:

“The Gross National Product includes air pollution, and ambulances to clear our highways from carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and jails for the people who break them. The Gross National Product includes the destruction of the redwoods and the death of Lake Superior. It grows with the production of napalm and missiles and nuclear warheads.”

The chart below, one of many put together by Demos, is a stark illustration of why GDP is such a poor measurement tool. As economic output has increased in the U.S., our biocapacity — the availability of natural resources — has fallen in tandem. If looking at the brown line in a narrow context, all is well. When considering the environmental impact of that growth, clearly we have a problem:


For decades, those concerned about sustainability have struggled to make innovative methods of measuring human and environmental well-being stick in the international zeitgeist. But they’ve only had limited success.

It’s not like there aren’t any options. Economists and statisticians have developed plenty of alternatives to measuring social and environmental health over the years. In 1992, the United Nations adopted the Human Development Index developed by Pakastani economist Mahbub ul Haq. It’s the most well-known alternative. However, while it’s been widely used by the UN and has been somewhat effective in challenging traditional ways of thinking, it still hasn’t sparked a major shift away from countries’ addiction to GDP.

So leaders are using this year’s Earth Summit to try to change the dialogue. Today they announced plans to craft a new index through the UN’s Human Development Report Office that would track the cost of human development on future generations, rather than just use the current Human Development Index to track current well-being. It’s the UN’s version 2.0.

But fleshing out that new model is complicated. The UNDP’s Helen Clark expressed the difficulties in establishing a new set of metrics: “What should be measured? And what indicators could be used? What are overriding principles? What do policymakers need to know?”

Answering those questions becomes more difficult the deeper you want to go. The World Bank’s Mary Barton Dock provided a fantastic example of how complicated it can be valuing natural capital.

Read more

Security

Apple Store Refuses To Sell Popular Devices To Iranian Americans

By Adam Peck on Jun 20, 2012 at 6:35 pm

Two would-be customers at an Alpharetta, Georgia Apple Store walked out empty handed last week after the store refused to sell them Apple’s popular iPad and iPhone gadgets because the two customers were speaking Farsi.

According to a report by local TV station WSB-TV, Sahar Sabet and her uncle were speaking with one another in Farsi when a sales representative approached them and said that the store couldn’t sell them any products because Apple’s corporate policy prohibits the sale of any goods to Iran without authorization by the US government. Sabet was attempting to buy the iPad as a gift for her cousin who lives in Iran.

Sabet, who says she left the store in tears, is a US citizen. She called Apple’s customer relations number, where an employee apologized and advised her that she could buy the device online. But Sabet’s case is hardly a case of a misinformed salesperson: Apple stores have done this before.

Zack Jafarzadeh, another Iranian American currently living in Virginia, also spoke with WSB-TV about a similar instance at a different Apple store, where he wasn’t allowed to purchase an iPhone with a friend after a clerk overheard him speaking in Farsi.

Nor does Apple’s history of questionable sales policies extend just to Iranians. In 2010, New York’s then-Attorney General Andrew Cuomo opened an investigation into several claims that New York City’s Apple Stores were discriminating against Asian customers. And in that same year, Apple raised eyebrows after they refused to accept cash as a form of payment for iPads. In all cases, the miscommunications seemed to originate not with overzealous sales representatives but with Apple’s own store policies.

NPR reached out to Apple for a comment, but Apple has thus far remained silent on the case in Georgia.

NEWS FLASH

Minnesota Marriage Inequality Campaign Continues To Hide Donors | Minnesota for Marriage, the coalition advocating for a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, filed its latest campaign disclosure documents this afternoon, and unsurprisingly, the group continues to hide the sources of most of its funding. Of the $588,317.30 of contributions received, over 96 percent came in lump sum from the Minnesota Catholic Conference ($400,000), Minnesota Family Council ($150,000), and National Organization for Marriage ($15,000). The coalition identified only 26 donors outside of those three organizations. In contrast, not only did Minnesotans United for All Families raise significantly more, but they also identified 2,789 separate donors, according to a rough ThinkProgress count*. It’s not hard to see which campaign is trying to hide its efforts and which represents a true coalition of Minnesotans.

*Thanks to Steven Perlberg, Nina Liss-Schultz, and Ben Sherman for helping to count donors.

Politics

THINKPROGRESS WHIP COUNT: 147 Republicans Oppose Obama’s Immigration Order, 1 Supports

By Guest Blogger on Jun 20, 2012 at 6:11 pm

by Angela Guo

After President Obama’s announcement last week halting deportations for many young undocumented immigrants, the Republican response was notably muted. GOP House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) expressed frustration with the way the directive was enacted, but not the substance of the policy. Then Mitt Romney, the effective leader of the party, said the measure does not represent a “long-term solution.” Instead, he criticized the President’s directive only by indicating that it undermines Republican support for similar ideas.

However, when ThinkProgress called the offices of all House and Senate Republicans to discuss the policy, responses were clear: Almost every congressional Republican willing to give a statement opposed the President’s new initiative.

The only exception was Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-18), a Cuban immigrant who previously voted for the DREAM Act.; she expressed her support for the policy. Reps Erik Paulsen (R-MN) and Lee Terry (R-NE) also said they would support a legislative initiative, but opposed the policy because of the way it was enacted.

A number of offices expressed that they were still evaluating the announcement or that they were unwilling to give a statement until the Romney campaign had articulated a clear stance.

The GOP’s suggestion that the directive prevents bipartisan reform seems to ignore the fact that their own party has been the main obstacle in any possible reform efforts. Republicans have repeatedly revolted against any comprehensive immigration plan, including the DREAM Act and its predecessors, dragging the proposals through partisan sludge just to end in near party-line votes. And Sen. Rubio’s DREAM Act alternative has failed to materialize after three months of hype.

ThinkProgress interns Nina Liss-Schultz and Ben Sherman also served as reporters for this post.

NEWS FLASH

FBI Still Probing GOP Rep’s Campaign Finances | The New York Observer’s Colin Campbell reports that the F.B.I. reached out to at least one person in recent weeks about Rep. Michael Grimm’s (R-NY) allegedly illegal campaign financing in his 2010 race. In early March, the AP reported that the F.B.I. was considering a formal investigation, compounded by June revelations that Grimm spent more than $300,000 out of his campaign coffers on mounting legal fees. In a statement to the Observer, Grimm denied any wrongdoing and “welcome(d) the news that (the probe) is heading towards completion.” Despite a pledge by Republican House leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) to maintain “zero tolerance” of ethics scandals, Republicans continue to stand by Grimm, who himself has in the past been soft on ethics violators.

By Ali Gharib on Jun 20, 2012 at 6:06 pm

Economy

Studies: Increasing The Minimum Wage During Times Of High Unemployment Doesn’t Hurt Job Growth

By Travis Waldron on Jun 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm

A group of House Democrats recently proposed legislation that would raise the federal minimum wage to $10 an hour, roughly where it would have to be to match the peak buying power the wage reached in 1968. Cities and states across the country are taking action on their own, raising their minimum wages in an effort to help low-income workers.

Opponents of minimum wage increases contest that raising the minimum wage will be costly for businesses and have a negative effect on job growth and employment. An analysis by the Center for American Progress’ Nick Bunker, David Madland, and the University of North Carolina’s T. William Lester, however, found five recent studies showing that increasing the minimum wage — even during periods of high unemployment — does not have a negative effect on job growth:

A significant body of academic research has found that raising the minimum wage does not result in job losses even during hard economic times. There are at least five different academic studies focusing on increases to the minimum wage—including increases ranging from 7 percent to 12.3 percent made during periods of high unemployment—that find an increase in the minimum wage has no significant effect on employment levels. The results are likely because the boost in demand and reduction in turnover provided by a minimum wage counteracts the higher wage costs.

Similarly, a simple analysis of increases to the minimum wage on the state level, even during periods of state unemployment rates above 8 percent, shows that the minimum wage does not kill jobs. Indeed the states in our simple analysis had job growth slightly above the national average. [...]

All the studies came to the same conclusion—that raising the minimum wage had no effect on employment.

While increasing the minimum wage likely has no effect on job creation, it does have a tangible benefit for workers. Eight states increased their minimum wage at the beginning of 2012, providing extra benefits to 1.4 million workers. More than half of the workers directly affected by a minimum wage increase, as well as more than half who would be indirectly affected, are women, meaning increasing the wage provides help to a segment of the population that already faces significant disadvantages in the workplace.

NEWS FLASH

Red Cross Worker Dies In Yemen Airstrike | A Yemeni staff member of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) died today in an airstrike in Yemen. It’s not immediately clear if the death of 35-year-old Hussein Saleh was due to Yemeni aircraft attacks or a U.S. drone, but Yemeni forces were reportedly attacking alleged militants in the area. The ICRC was “deeply shocked and dismayed,” the humanitarian relief group said in a statement noting that “circumstances behind this incident remain unclear.”

By Ali Gharib on Jun 20, 2012 at 5:45 pm

Justice

NC Senate Poised to Gut Racial Justice Act

By Guest Blogger on Jun 20, 2012 at 5:35 pm

A bill that would gut North Carolina’s Racial Justice Act was voted out of committee in the state Senate today. SB 416, An Act to Amend Death Penalty Procedures, was approved by the NC House of Representatives last week by a vote of 73-47, a veto-proof majority and awaits floor action in the Senate. The Senate is also expected to approve the bill by a veto-proof margin.

The Racial Justice Act, a historic piece of legislation enacted in 2009, allows North Carolina death row inmates to reduce their sentences to life in prison without parole in certain circumstances. Inmates must show that race played a substantive factor in “decisions to seek or impose the sentence of death in the county, the prosecutorial district, the judicial division, or the State at the time the death sentence was sought or imposed.” The law is unique in that it allows inmates to challenge their sentences based on widespread racial bias instead of having to prove that there was discrimination in their particular case.

SB 416 looks to change all of that. By limiting the use of statistics in proving widespread discrimination, the new bill looks dramatically scale back the Racial Justice Act:

The bill passed this week by the House would allow condemned inmates to present statistics only for the county or judicial district where the crime was committed, rather than statewide, and only covering a period of 10 years before the crime and two years after the imposition of the sentence. Statistics alone would not be sufficient to prove racial bias in imposition of the death sentence; defendants would have to come up with some other evidence.

“This bill guts the NC Racial Justice Act, plain and simple,” Scott Bass, director of Murder Victims’ Families for Reconciliation, said in a statement. “What legislators do not understand is that by passing this law, they not only shirk their responsibility to address documented racial bias in the system, they will also be costing taxpayers millions of dollars in extra expense and slowing resolution of death penalty cases by adding additional layers of appeals.”

“This bill is an attempt to sweep that evidence under the rug by allowing the state to ignore mountains of statistics pointing to the pervasive and disturbing role that race plays in jury selection and sentencing,” said Sarah Preston of the ACLU of North Carolina. “We cannot turn our backs on such evidence, as this bill seeks to do.”

Last year, Gov. Beverly Perdue (D) vetoed a similar bill that would have essentially voided the Racial Justice Act. The Racial Justice Act was invoked for the first time in April. In a 167-page decision, Judge Greg Weeks ruled that race unfairly tainted jury selection over a 20-year period, stating that race was “a materially, practically and statistically significant factor in the decision to exercise preemptory challenges during jury selection.”

–Alex Brown

Alyssa

What Neill Blomkamp’s ‘Elysium’ Has In Common With Guillermo Del Toro’s ‘Pacific Rim’

By Alyssa Rosenberg on Jun 20, 2012 at 5:08 pm

In the years I’ve been working as a professional critic, I’ve never been as excited for a follow-up to a directorial debut as I have been for whatever Niell Blomkamp decided to do after District 9, his story of a South Africa in which white and black citizens have united to enforce apartheid on a group of stranded aliens they’ve herded into townships, which for my money was both the smartest alien invasion movie and one of the most shattering love stories in years. I’d heard rumbles that his subsequent feature, Elysium, would follow up on some of the same themes, and according to the first reported plot summary, it sounds like that’s the case:

In the year 2159 two classes of people exist: the very wealthy who live on a pristine man-made space station called Elysium, and the rest, who live on an overpopulated, ruined Earth. Secretary Rhodes (Jodie Foster), a hard the government official, will stop at nothing to enforce anti-immigration laws and preserve the luxurious lifestyle of the citizens of Elysium. That doesn’t stop the people of Earth from trying to get in, by any means they can. When unlucky Max (Matt Damon) is backed into a corner, he agrees to take on a daunting mission that if successful will not only save his life, but could bring equality to these polarized worlds.

In between this and Guillermo Del Toro’s Pacific Rim (In Time did this too, but less well) I’m very, very excited for the fact that a new crop of sci-fi movies that recognize that mobility is something that gets more valuable as society gets more stratified. Immigration reform gets treated like a poor people’s cause, in some limited cases, like it’s a gay cause—lack of mobility from one country to the next becomes a magnifying factor of the joblesseness and violence people face in Mexico, or the second-class treatment by the federal government of marriages between same-sex couples. But the ability to move across borders, and to do so free from harassment isn’t something we should take for granted. I’ve always loved fiction like Kim Stanley Robinson’s Mars trilogy, which recognizes that restricting mobility and immigration is a way of reinforcing inequality. I’m choosing to believe that two big-budget science fiction movies on one of my favorite themes is my reward for fighting sexism.

Security

Journalist Group On Missing Pro-Israel Iraqi Kurd: ‘We Fear The Worst’

By Ali Gharib on Jun 20, 2012 at 4:53 pm

Israel-Kurd Institute's logo

On June 8, the Iraqi-Kurdish journalist Mouloud Anfand, travelling in the city of Sulaimaniyah, went for a routine appointment and never showed back up. A day later, he phone colleagues and told them he was on personal business and would be back in a week. Now his colleagues and an international group of journalists’ advocates are taking his case public and suggesting Iran may have been involved in his disappearance.

Why Iran? Anfand, who is of Iranian origin but lives and works in Iraqi Kurdistan, has been a sore point between the Iranian government and Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). He edits the magazine Israel-Kurd, a project of the Israel-Kurd Institute which promotes better ties between the KRG and Israel, and encourages Kurdish Jews living in Israel to return to Iraqi Kurdistan. Iran reportedly asked KRG to shut the magazine down, but the Kurdish government refused.

On June 13, a woman speaking Farsi answered Anfand’s phone, according to his colleague at Israel-Kurd, Diyari Mohammed, raising suspicions that the Islamic Republic was involved.

The journalism advocacy group Reporters Without Borders (RSF) put out a release today calling for an investigation:

We fear the worst and we urge the autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government’s authorities to do everything possible to find Mouloud Anfand. And we therefore call for an immediate investigation into this journalist’s disappearance.

The RSF release added that Iran says that by keeping Israel-Kurd open, KRG is “facilitating the ‘activities of the Zionist enemy’s agents,’ the Israeli intelligence services.” (“Israel-Kurd” seems an unlikely name for a covert Israeli spy front.)

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up