6.3 Results
101
6.3 Results
To be consistent across our analysis, the same coloring system is employed to graph
the ESRs for all the three environmental issues, namely, carbon emissions (climate
change), water use, and land use. Further, we choose to display the log(ESR) instead
of an ESR, to ensure that a ratio of 2/1 and a ratio of 1/2 are treated equivalently, for
instance. We consider this to be superior to data-dependent normalization depending
exclusively on what is included in the sample. Countries with environmental sustainability (ESR < 1 or log(ESR) < 0) are shown in green colors, and countries with
environmental unsustainability (ESR > 1 or log(ESR) > 0) are shown in red colors.
ESR = 1 or log(ESR) = 0 is the marginal value. However, one cannot claim to be
so precise. For this reason, we define the log(ESR) between −0.25 and 0.25 to be
the risky intervals, which corresponds to an ESR between 0.56 and 1.78. While an
ESR bounded by less than 0.56 might not be the sufficient conditions for environmental sustainability, we believe that it is a prerequisite for that. In the following, we
examine the ESRs for the 28 nations in terms of carbon emissions, water use, and
land use, respectively.
6.3.1 The Environmental Sustainability of National Carbon
Emissions
In the case of carbon emissions, the global ESR is estimated at 2.42, indicating that the
human economy emits nearly 2.5 times the permissible GHGs, beyond which global
warming by 2050 is very likely to cross the 2 °C target. This estimate highlights the
worldwide unsustainability of the Earth’s climate system arising from immoderate
carbon emissions. Figure 6.1 presents a “heat map” of national-scale environmental
sustainability associated with carbon emissions. India is the only country operating
within the carbon boundary, with an ESR of 0.54. The three countries falling in the
risky intervals between sustainability and unsustainability are Indonesia, Brazil, and
China, with an ESR of 0.72, 1.24, and 1.31, respectively. The rest of the countries go
beyond the stable environmental state, of which the ESRs vary considerably, ranging
from 1.79 for Turkey to 8.62 for the USA. Twenty-two nations have ESRs higher
than the global value, and this is perhaps partly due to the fact that many of the
countries investigated here are developed countries that tend to rely more heavily on
carbon-intensive goods and services.
As a genuine “natural availability” is lacking and is replaced by a per capita share
of the planetary carbon boundary, there are several large countries that already exceed
this share by far, such as the USA and China. While China has overtaken the USA as
the world’s top annual emitter of CO 2 (Jones 2007), our analysis demonstrates that
American ESR exceeds 5.5 times that of China and thus remains the primary contributor to the unsustainability of the global climate system. This discrepancy partially
101
6.3 Results
To be consistent across our analysis, the same coloring system is employed to graph
the ESRs for all the three environmental issues, namely, carbon emissions (climate
change), water use, and land use. Further, we choose to display the log(ESR) instead
of an ESR, to ensure that a ratio of 2/1 and a ratio of 1/2 are treated equivalently, for
instance. We consider this to be superior to data-dependent normalization depending
exclusively on what is included in the sample. Countries with environmental sustainability (ESR < 1 or log(ESR) < 0) are shown in green colors, and countries with
environmental unsustainability (ESR > 1 or log(ESR) > 0) are shown in red colors.
ESR = 1 or log(ESR) = 0 is the marginal value. However, one cannot claim to be
so precise. For this reason, we define the log(ESR) between −0.25 and 0.25 to be
the risky intervals, which corresponds to an ESR between 0.56 and 1.78. While an
ESR bounded by less than 0.56 might not be the sufficient conditions for environmental sustainability, we believe that it is a prerequisite for that. In the following, we
examine the ESRs for the 28 nations in terms of carbon emissions, water use, and
land use, respectively.
6.3.1 The Environmental Sustainability of National Carbon
Emissions
In the case of carbon emissions, the global ESR is estimated at 2.42, indicating that the
human economy emits nearly 2.5 times the permissible GHGs, beyond which global
warming by 2050 is very likely to cross the 2 °C target. This estimate highlights the
worldwide unsustainability of the Earth’s climate system arising from immoderate
carbon emissions. Figure 6.1 presents a “heat map” of national-scale environmental
sustainability associated with carbon emissions. India is the only country operating
within the carbon boundary, with an ESR of 0.54. The three countries falling in the
risky intervals between sustainability and unsustainability are Indonesia, Brazil, and
China, with an ESR of 0.72, 1.24, and 1.31, respectively. The rest of the countries go
beyond the stable environmental state, of which the ESRs vary considerably, ranging
from 1.79 for Turkey to 8.62 for the USA. Twenty-two nations have ESRs higher
than the global value, and this is perhaps partly due to the fact that many of the
countries investigated here are developed countries that tend to rely more heavily on
carbon-intensive goods and services.
As a genuine “natural availability” is lacking and is replaced by a per capita share
of the planetary carbon boundary, there are several large countries that already exceed
this share by far, such as the USA and China. While China has overtaken the USA as
the world’s top annual emitter of CO 2 (Jones 2007), our analysis demonstrates that
American ESR exceeds 5.5 times that of China and thus remains the primary contributor to the unsustainability of the global climate system. This discrepancy partially