search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
2.4 SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION


at


local


scales. Such consumption pressures often


produce localized environmental pressures that, while consequential, seldom have global impacts. On the other hand, the consumption and production of affluence create global pressures, including climate change and other transformations of ecosystems at global scales. In terms of climate change, the relationship between ‘lifestyle consumption’ and emissions presents a reverse portrait: the poorest 50% of the global population is responsible for around 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions, while the richest 10% of people in the world are responsible for around 50% of global emissions (Oxfam 2015; 2016).


The world’s poor, who produce the least greenhouse gas emissions, are the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change. A recent World Bank analysis found that most people live in countries where the poorest 20% of the population are more exposed to disasters such as droughts, floods and heat waves than the average population as a whole – significantly so in many countries in Africa and South East Asia (Hallegate et al. 2016). In most countries it is the poorest people who face the greatest environmental risks overall, including through exposures to air, water and soil pollution, hazardous waste and degraded environments (OHCHR 2016; UNEP 2012b; WHO 2010).


Such inequalities are manifested along several social axes. Women often face greater environmental risks than men, rural communities may be more exposed than urban ones, and groups who are marginalized because of race, ethnicity or other factors are likely to be affected disproportionately (Oxfam 2015; Ringquist 2005). Poverty is an environmental threat-multiplier and, in most parts of the world, women are more likely than men to live in extreme poverty (UN 2015; UNDP 2015c; USAID 2015; UNDP n.d.).


People in developing countries have the right to aspire to and achieve a higher standard of living. As individuals and economies emulate the patterns of affluent developing countries, however, there will be global-scale environmental impacts. The consumption patterns of the new consumer classes will result in


larger houses and apartments fitted with new appliances, increasing private car ownership, more air travel, a range of new manufactured goods, and new diets based on much larger amounts of meat and dairy. Without interventions to suggest and support more sustainable paths, emulation of developed countries’


consumption patterns in emerging and developing economies threatens to overwhelm ecosystems already on the verge of collapse following decades of over- consumption in the developed world (UNEP 2015a; UNEP 2015b; UNEP 2010).


Households as sites of consumption


How to measure consumption, particularly as a driver of environmental change, is a challenge. In measuring greenhouse gas emissions, for example, it is extremely difficult to separate consumption emissions from production emissions (Oxfam 2015). One approach is to determine “ecological footprints”, which usually measure consumption as end-user demand. Consumption of


resources by industrial sectors is


typically not represented as intrinsic to those sectors, but rather as embedded in end-user sectors such as governments or households. Using this footprint lens, the household is positioned as the primary locus of consumption demand in most countries. In the United Arab Emirates, for example, which has an extremely high per capita ecological footprint, a 2010 study found that household demand represented 57% of the country’s total ecological footprint (Figure 2.4.1) (EWS-WWF 2010). Household demand can be divided into separate components (e.g. food, mobility, goods, housing) (Box 2.4.1).


Figure 2.4.1: Ecological footprint of the United Arab Emirates by demand sector.


57% Household


30%


Business and Industry


57% Government Source: EWS-WWF (2010)


105


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196  |  Page 197  |  Page 198  |  Page 199  |  Page 200  |  Page 201  |  Page 202  |  Page 203  |  Page 204  |  Page 205  |  Page 206  |  Page 207  |  Page 208  |  Page 209  |  Page 210  |  Page 211  |  Page 212  |  Page 213  |  Page 214  |  Page 215  |  Page 216  |  Page 217  |  Page 218  |  Page 219  |  Page 220  |  Page 221  |  Page 222  |  Page 223  |  Page 224  |  Page 225  |  Page 226  |  Page 227  |  Page 228  |  Page 229  |  Page 230  |  Page 231  |  Page 232  |  Page 233  |  Page 234  |  Page 235  |  Page 236  |  Page 237  |  Page 238  |  Page 239  |  Page 240  |  Page 241  |  Page 242