Environmental Performance Index

The Environmental Performance Index (EPI) is an attempt to quantify and compare the ecological performance of countries and companies. It was developed by the Environmental Sustainability Index department at Yale University and is based on the methodology of utility analysis . The index was developed in collaboration with Columbia University , the World Economic Forum and the Joint Research Center of the European Commission .

World map of the Environmental Performance Index (2006)

The following items appear since 2012 is out of date to be : EPI by 2014 (and 2012) is missing
Please help with to the missing information research and insert .

EPI overall ranking (top 30 countries)
rank	country	2010	2008	2006
1	Iceland	93.5	87.6	82.1
2	Switzerland	89.1	95.5	81.4
3	Costa Rica	86.4	90.5	81.6
4th	Sweden	86.0	93.1	87.8
5	Norway	81.1	93.1	80.2
6th	Mauritius	80.6	78.1
7th	France	78.2	87.8	82.5
8th	Austria	78.1	89.4	85.2
9	Cuba	78.1	80.7
10	Colombia	76.8	88.3	80.4
11	Malta	76.3	nv
12	Finland	74.7	91.4	87.0
13	Slovakia	74.4	86.0	79.1
14th	United Kingdom	74.2	86.3	85.6
15th	New Zealand	73.4	88.9	88.0
16	Chile	73.3	83.4	78.9
17th	Germany	73.2	86.3	79.4
18th	Italy	73.1	84.2	79.8
19th	Portugal	73.0	85.8	82.9
20th	Japan	72.5	84.5	81.9
21st	Latvia	72.5	88.8	nv
22nd	Czech Republic	71.6	76.8
23	Albania	71.4	84.0	68.9
24	Panama	71.4	83.1
25th	Spain	70.6	83.1	79.2
26th	Belize	69.9	71.7
27	Antigua and Barbuda	69.8	nv
28	Singapore	69.6	nv
29	Serbia	69.4	nv
30th	Ecuador	69.3	84.4	75.5

Indicators

The Environmental Performance Index comprises 16 indicators from the areas of environmental health , air quality , water , biodiversity , natural resources and energy . They should map both the current state and the dynamics of the ecosystem :

Area	category	indicator	source	Target value	Weighting within the category	Overall weighting
State of the ecosystem		particulate matter	World Bank , WHO	10 µg / m³	13%	50%
		Air pollution in buildings	WHO	0% of households use solid fuels	22%
		Drinking water	WHO- UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program	100% access	22%
		Sanitation	WHO-UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program ( JMP )	100% access	21%
		Infant mortality	UN Population Division	0 deaths per 1000 inhabitants between 1 and 4	21%
Dynamics of the ecosystem	air	particulate matter	World Bank, WHO	10 µg / m³	50%	10%
		Regional ozone pollution	MOZART model	15 ppb	50%
	water	Nitrogen pollution	UNH Water Systems Analysis Group	1 mg / liter	50%	10%
		Water consumption	UNH Water Systems Analysis Group	0% excessive consumption	50%
	biodiversity	Protection of the ecological budget	CIESIN , Wildlife Conservation Society	90% of the ecological budget under protection	39%	10%
		Protection of nature	CIESIN	10% for all biomes	39%
		Forest use	FAO	3%	15%
		Water consumption	UNH Water Systems Analysis Group	0% excessive consumption	7%
	Natural resources	Forest use	FAO	3%	33%	10%
		overfishing	South Pacific Applied Geosciences Commission	no overfishing	33%
		Agricultural subsidies	WTO, US Department of Agriculture	0%	33%
	Sustainable energy	Energy efficiency	Energy Information Administration	1,650 terajoules per million $ of GDP	43%	10%
		Renewable energy	Energy Information Administration	100%	10%
		CO 2 per GDP	Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center	no emissions	47%

Details of the results

What is striking is a close connection between the wealth of a state and its performance in environmental protection. Most developed countries achieve high environmental standards. Those countries with the lowest EPI ratings, such as Ethiopia, Mali, Mauritania, Chad and Niger, are consistently poor. They have little investment capacity for infrastructure, including water and sanitation, and they tend to have weak environmental regulatory agencies.

Austria

Like most highly developed countries, Austria scores well for child mortality and access to clean drinking water. The country is also characterized by the efficient use of energy and resources. On the other hand, there were bad grades in nature conservation. In the “Ecoregion Protection” indicator, Austria only achieved 12 points and performed very poorly in comparison to France (70 points) and Great Britain (69 points). The evaluation is based on the entries of the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) established by the World Conservation Union (IUCN) and the United Nations Environment Program . Austria's values ​​for coverage by protected areas are even worse. While Great Britain has 29 points, Austria only received 6 points. The authors emphasize, however, that only the wilderness areas that are still present today were used in the calculation. States that destroyed their wilderness years ago received no deductions.

Other states

The first Pilot 2006 Environmental Performance Index was presented on January 26, 2006 at the World Economic Forum . The three most environmentally friendly countries were New Zealand , Sweden and Finland . In the latest ranking from 2008, Switzerland , Norway and Sweden are ahead.

Web links

• Environmental Performance Index - project homepage with interactive map (English)

swell

1. ↑ Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy, Center for International Earth Science Information Network at Columbia University: Environmental Performance Index 2010 ( English , PDF) Archived from the original on April 13, 2010. Information: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved November 11, 2010. 
2. ↑ Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy, Center for International Earth Science Information Network at Columbia University: Environmental Performance Index 2008 ( English , PDF) Archived from the original on February 4, 2010. Information: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved January 25, 2008. 
3. ↑ ^{a b} Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy, Center for International Earth Science Information Network at Columbia University: Pilot 2006 Environmental Performance Index ( English , PDF) Archived from the original on June 17, 2007. Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and still Not checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved June 17, 2007. 
4. ↑ ^{a b} "Environmental Performance Index (EPI) 2006" - Austria lands in 6th place in a global environmental comparison ( memento of the original from February 12, 2008 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , WKO, 2006