The measures for Environmental sustainability– both renewable and nonrenewable resources and waste absorptive capacity. A number of indicators are proposed. See the following references.

Mori, K., & Christodoulou, A. (2012). Review of sustainability indices and indicators: Towards a new City Sustainability Index (CSI). Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 32(1), 94-106. (http://www.sze.hu/fk/kornyezet/Cikkek3/Review-of-sustainability-indices-and-indicators-Towards-a-new-City-Sustainability-Index-(CSI)_%5Bpub_year%5D_Environmental-Impact-Assessment-Review.pdf)

Moldan, B., Janoušková, S., & Hák, T. (2012). How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: Indicators and targets. Ecological Indicators, 17, 4-13. (http://moodle.tau.ac.il/2012/pluginfile.php/215915/mod_resource/content/0/Moldan,%20Janouskova%20%20Hak%202012.pdf)

Hi,

Please have a look at the source Im sharing bellow. Is trying to answer your question... unfortunatelly just in spanish, but I think it worth to have a look at it:

https://www.academia.edu/6417146/Una_Teoria_Matematica_de_la_Sostenibilidad_y_el_Desarrollo_Sostenible

Regards

Luis

The measures for Environmental sustainability– both renewable and nonrenewable resources and waste absorptive capacity. A number of indicators are proposed. See the following references.

Mori, K., & Christodoulou, A. (2012). Review of sustainability indices and indicators: Towards a new City Sustainability Index (CSI). Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 32(1), 94-106. (http://www.sze.hu/fk/kornyezet/Cikkek3/Review-of-sustainability-indices-and-indicators-Towards-a-new-City-Sustainability-Index-(CSI)_%5Bpub_year%5D_Environmental-Impact-Assessment-Review.pdf)

Moldan, B., Janoušková, S., & Hák, T. (2012). How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: Indicators and targets. Ecological Indicators, 17, 4-13. (http://moodle.tau.ac.il/2012/pluginfile.php/215915/mod_resource/content/0/Moldan,%20Janouskova%20%20Hak%202012.pdf)

See below two papers related to Ecological sustainability, the 1st paper measured actual forest sustainability in relation to forest harvest (at different rates) and forest C storage and the 2nd paper discussed about the importance of biodiversity for the stability of ecosystems (with reference to keystone species which are crucial for the stability of an ecosystem). Hope these papers would be of help to you!

1.S. J. Colombo, J. Chen, M. T. Ter-Mikaelian, J. McKechnie, P. C. Elkie,H. L. MacLean, L. S. Heath. 2012. Forest protection and forest harvest as strategies for ecological sustainability and climate change mitigation. Forest Ecology and Management. 281: 140-151

2.Bram G. W. Aarts and Pie and H. Nienhuis. 1999. Ecological sustainability and biodiversity. Int. J Sus Development.

World Ecol. 6: 89-102.

This is an interesting question, i love to follow this question for improving my knowledge

These are very interesting documents:

Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs - UK Government (2013)

Sustainable Development Indicators:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223992/0_SDIs_final__2_.pdf

and also

United Nations (2007)

Indicators of Sustainable Development: Guidelines and Methodologies:

http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/indicators/guidelines.pdf

You might be interested also in the websile of the Research programme financed by the European Union - DG R&I (within FP7):

The Integration of Mainstream Economic Indicators with Sustainable Development Objectives IN-STREAM

http://in-stream.eu

In the context of wild medicinal plant harvest, there exists a rigorous sustainability standard, called the Fair Wild Standard (FWS) with ecological, economic and social criteria and performance indicators for measuring compliance. I have had direct experience with the implementation of the FWS with local communities of plant harvesters in European and Asian countries. An independent inspection and certification organization (Institute for Market Ecology (IMO) carries out annual inspections at each site. The FairWild Standard and corresponding Performance Indicators guidance are available in thirteen languages (Armenian, Azeri, Bosnian, English, French, Georgian, German, Hungarian, Japanese, Polish, Portuguese, Spanish, and Russian) at: http://www.fairwild.org/documents/

To be very precise, perhaps no single index denotes sustainability index...,however, there exist a host of study reports and proposals in showing it as a set of metrics. But well, still there is controversies in universality and consistency with reference to unit level or global interests. Integration, synergy and conflicts among them open another domain of research. I am personally keenly interested in these issues.

In my view, sustainability is a whole. You need a systemic approach. To be sustainable, impacts of development must be assessed on the 4 capitals (human/social, environmental, economic and institutional), not only on one. You need a large set of indicators to do that. Quantitative indicators can be developed on all these fields.Eurostat has done that, and we have done that at the Belgian level too (www.indicators.be).

This question needs more of a philosophical approach than scientific. The definition of sustainability changes from organization to organization from an individual to another.An environmentalist may generally be concerned with the ecological sustainability where as an economists will be concerned with the economic sustainability, both of them may not be on the same page in each others perspective.

i have attached a document below from UN it may clarify something.

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/42/ares42-187.htm

This is image related to the same

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Circles_of_Sustainability_image_(assessment_-_Melbourne_2011).jpg

The ISO standard for environmental management:

ISO 14040 (2006), Environmental Management–Life Cycle Assessment– Principles and Framework, International Standards Organization.

Indeed, sustainable development can be defined by using UN documents. I would mention the Brundtland Report (1987), the Rio (1992) declaration (27 principles), the Johannesburg Declaration (3 overarching objectives) and the Rio+20 (2012) declaration (The future we want). In Belgium, these are the key documents on which we rely to define sustainable development as a systemic, transdisciplinary and scientific concept.

You can measure sustainability. There are three types of sustainability: They are ecological, economical and energitical sustainability. In my research I combined three of them and came up with a sustainability index. I have not published the full paper but you can find the abstract in 2013 Midwest meeting of American Society of Animal Science.

The added value of sustainability is the long-term, broad scope, wide scale approach. Since this is most often too complex to work with we reduce and fragment this concept. E.g. we separate in ecol., econ. and social dimensions. It is OK to work in this way. But the clue of sustainability is to 'push the envelop' and to integrate as much as we can (time, scope, scale). Only than it is to be called sustainability research. This holds true if it comes to the question of measurement and indicators. Each indicator you build is a reduction of reality (that it it's purpose). But the judgement if its a 'good' reduction or not depends on your (research) question. So, to measure if a glass bottle is more sustainable than plastic you are mainly in the env. and econ. dimension. You don't need to measure the governance system for that. However, to measure if a governance system is more sustainable than another you need more than quantitative, physical measures. Rather, you have to deal with qualitative social concerns, justice, and normative values. It's not impossible to measure this but we have still a lot (social/political science) research to do.

Hawken (1993) “leave the world better than you found it, take no more than you need, try not to harm life or the environment, [and] make amends if you do.” (S.P Haden et al. 2009)

Anything can be 'measured', even the less tangible (values-related) dimensions of sustainability, if a group of people can agree on a relevant set of indicators and data collection methods within a clearly defined practical context. It is a myth that definitions of sustainability can ever be objective and value-free, but it's also a myth that an objective definition is essential for measurement. This free open-access article might be of interest.

http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/5/7/3035

I have my difficulties with this way of measuring sustainability. Apart from the fact, that measuring is mostly based on linear-logic measurements whereas sustainability does not function in a linear-logic way - is it realistic to measure sustainability in such a anthroprocentric way: three of four categories being related to the human world and the shortsighted human interests and the fourth, ecological sustainability, being defined according to the shortsighted human interests? Bee deaths has become a frightening symbol (and it might become more) to where anthroprocentric models lead that neglect factors that seem to play a minor role for the long term survival of the human race. I think we should develop totally new models.

Yes, we can and you should!! As the Scottish physicist Lord Kelvin has said in his lecture on "Electrical Units of Measurement" (3 May 1883), "I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be.". Therefore, any quantitative indicator (metrics) on sustainability is much better than just qualitatively speaking on this topics, as e.g. done by the so called 12 principles of Sustainable Chemistry.

The focus and scale of sustainability efforts depend on local conditions, including resources, politics, individual actions, and the unique features of the community (Beth E. Lachman). You may look at the following link:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800998000275

sustainability is about balancing people's needs and planet's needs.The upcoming transition from the MDG era to a new agenda beyond 2015 (Post-2015) presents a unique opportunity to look again at the concept of sustainable development. What we need is a global long term vision of a sustainable world in which, by mid century, 9 billion people can live thriving, peaceful and healthy lives and livelihoods, while safeguarding the Earth’s life support system, on which the welfare of current and future generations depends (a slight adaptation of the Brundtland definition). This vision for a sustainable future needs to recognize and balance basic needs for people and planet, for example:

People’s needs Planet needs

Eradicate poverty and hunger balance nutrient and hydrological cycles

Universal quality education pollution abatement

Gender equality biodiversity

Clean air, water, soil ecosystem services

Energy Climate stability

Peace and security deforestation

The function of a long term vision would be to ensure that approaches and solutions proposed for the medium term (Post-2015) will seek transformational, rather than incremental change and outcomes.

A useful measure to accompany this transition is the ecological footprint.With current consumption at 150% of the earth’s annual regenerative capacity, the new development agenda beyond 2015 must address the combined ambitions of the MDGs (poverty eradication) and the Rio+20 Summit (green economy and sustainable development) as two sides of the same coin.

Apparently so. Please find link to this review article which summarises the tools that are used to measure sustainability in the building sector. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=17095586

Dear Huub,

I agree with your statement. We need a transformation to reduce consumption, to increase enoughness and consistency. But simultaneously humankind need to transform the governance and maybe the economic system. This is much more than "only" poverty eradication. The World Social Report gives some examples and approaches for such social innovation and transition.

http://www.worldsocialscience.org/activities/world-social-science-report/the-2013-report/read-changing-global-environments/

Sustainability refers to five main capitals: natural capital, social capital, manufactured capital, financial capital, and human capital. Urban sustainability, but sustainability in general, should refer to those forms of capital. It hypothesizes that a balance among these five types of capital is necessary to satisfy human needs and generate individual and community well-being (Costanza et al., 1997).

Natural Capital is any stock or flow of energy and material that produces goods and services. It includes:

Resources - renewable and non-renewable materials

Sinks - that absorb, neutralise or recycle wastes

Processes - such as climate regulation. Natural capital is the basis not only of production but of life itself!

Human Capital consists of people's health, knowledge, skills and motivation. All these things are needed for productive work. Enhancing human capital through education and training is central to a flourishing economy.

Social Capital concerns the institutions that help us maintain and develop human capital in partnership with others; e.g. families, communities, businesses, trade unions, schools, and voluntary organisations.

Manufactured Capital comprises material goods or fixed assets which contribute to the production process rather than being the output itself – e.g. tools, machines and buildings.

Financial Capital plays an important role in our economy, enabling the other types of Capital to be owned and traded. But unlike the other types, it has no real value itself but is representative of natural, human, social or manufactured capital; e.g. shares, bonds or banknotes.

Any kind of capital has its own indicators and indices. The sustainability assessment should find out the best balance among the five integrated and overlapping capitals in a specific context.

There are scores of definitions of sustainable development. But, the most widely used and in a sense standard one is that given by in Brudtland Commission’s report, Our Common Future, 1987. It states, “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

For, the concept of sustainability gained popularity and became mandatory part of the public policy of every nation which is member of the UNO, therefore, my opinion is based on this so-called standard definition of sustainable development:

1. In the first place, this definition is nebulous vaguely referring to policy measures and actions that let not wasteful use and degradation of resources.

2. Since, directive definition is vague enough, every individual interpreted and define and redefined in specific situation. The North put emphasis on environment and ecology, The South put emphasis on limiting its population size and social justice with bettering life standard.

3. In such a situation, to develop a list of standard robust measures of sustainability in every sphere of human activity is a difficult task as know two scientists will agree on them.

4. It is because sustainability is a function of social, economic, technological and ecological themes.

5. Having social and economic aspects, it is quite hard to develop a clear concept that can be defined and incorporated as components of logical structure or empirical structure except for economics to some extent because, social science concepts if defined in empirical terms cannot grasp the full meanings of concepts and there is considerable overlapping (multicollinearity) among different measures of sustainability.

6. As such, a nation or a scientist according to one’s convenience define it and measure it. It is not a flaw, rather opportunity. Problems and situations, needs and necessities are not same throughout the world. In some place, it is utmost important to feed people and some places it is necessary to fight obesity and make money and healthcare available for treatment of diseases due to overeating.

7. It entails that do what is needed. As such, emphasis on different measures of sustainable development is a must. Therefore, it is not the question of oil and gas or coal mining are taken care off for their bad impacts on ecology, question is what is urgently needed. If at once , we stop using oil, gas, coal or mining, the world will stand still without light in homes, universities, without power in industries, without energy to drive cars, buses, trains, aeroplanes or ships to move. It should be the case, but human ingenuity takes time to substitute resources or discover new ones.

Measures and indicators of sustainability are given. Steps for overall sustainability performance measure are depicted! 

Green growth and sustainable development is attached! "The proposed set of indicators comprises about twenty-five indicators, not all of them are measurable today. The multi-dimensional nature of green growth requires a sufficient number of indicators to do justice to the various aspects of the issue at hand. But a large dashboard also carries the danger of losing a clear message that speaks to policy makers and helps communicating with the media and with citizens. A small set of ‘headline’ indicators is therefore being selected. These indicators should be able to track central elements of green growth and be representative of a broader set of green growth issue". Measurement framework is given!

http://www.mel.nist.gov/msid/SSP/introduction/measures_indicators.html

http://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/greengrowthindicators.htm

Dear Marcel,

Work is still in progress!

You may yourself find that several variables are overlapping representing same measures in part.

Dear Yudi,

Please check out my articles on developing sustainability indicators and their measurement.

Article Designing a General Set of Sustainability Indicators at the ...

Article Developing a Fuzzy Corporate Performance Rating System: A Pe...

Indicators of Sustainability!

"This web site is about indicators of sustainable community: ways to measure how well a community is meeting the needs and expectations of its present and future members. One of the primary goals of our site is to explain what indicators are, how indicators relate to sustainability, how to identify good indicators of sustainability, and how indicators can be used to measure progress toward building a sustainable community. Starting up an indicators project can be a bewildering task. From our experience in working with communities, we have found that everyone has the same set of basic questions..."

http://www.sustainablemeasures.com/indicators

Although researchers have been trying, but in most of the cases people are coming up with a family of indices including Don Jones Sustainability Indices etc. Trade-offs and compromises among the three dimensions seem to be the key things.You may even include ethics component. I tried to capture the issues conceptually for mining industry in my paper "House of Sustainability (HOS): an innovative approach to achieve sustainability in Indian coal sector", published as a chapter in " Handbook of Corporate Sustainability - frameworks, strategies and tools" edited by M A Quaddus and M A B Siddique and published by Edward Elgar.

In fact the index will also be affected by global and local policies, parameters and other issues. Technology development may even affect the index. But of course it is an important  and demanding research area.