Sustainable Consumption, 8/10/2018

Planetary Boundaries
and Well-Being:
the Living Well
Within Limits approach

Dr Julia Steinberger
Visiting Professor, University of Geneva
Sustainability Research Institute, University of Leeds
J.K.Steinberger@leeds.ac.uk @jksteinberger http://lili.leeds.ac.uk
 Outline
Motivation for this research
Energy & well-being
• The evidence so far, in stylised facts.
Testing a “Safe & Just Operating Space”
for humanity
Living Well Within Limits [LiLi]
• The ideas that form the basis of the project
• Results so far and plans moving forward
Motivation

October 8, 2018 3
 Implications
1. Urgent & large scale action is required
(“Radical emission reductions”)
o Getting to zero or close WITHIN next
twenty years.
2. Fastest & surest way to do that is
reduce consumption
o Reducing consumption doesn’t require
new technology or infrastructure.
3. But to date very little (no?) research
into how consumption could be
reduced while preserving/enhancing
well-being.

“We haven’t even TRIED mitigation yet.” Kevin Anderson

4
 Big research questions
 What kinds of consumption are
necessary for (associated with)
well-being?
 Why, and at what levels?
 What are the factors that would
allow consumption to be
reduced below existing levels
without negatively effecting
well-being?
 And what are the political
economy factors that trap us in
high consumption?
5
 Starting with basics
What is the energy use associated with
human development?

Stylised
Facts
6
 Well-being is fundamentally different from economic growth.

$ Economic development:
GDP per Linear relation with energy/carbon,
person log(GDP/cap) = a + b* log(EorC/cap)

Energy per person

Human development/wellbeing:
Saturation relation with energy/carbon,
(slightly) more complicated function.

Energy per person

Energy & well-being: stylised fact #1
“Saturation”
Beyond a certain level, energy increases do not
result in measurably higher well-being.

8
 “Saturation”

Source: A. Pasternak, United States Department of Energy, 2000

 Does international trade change this
picture?
Carbon importer

Carbon exporter
Life expectancy (years)

Carbon neutral

CO2 emissions: R2 = 0.65

Corrected for trade: R2 = 0.72 Steinberger et al,
2012, Nature
Climate Change
Carbon emissions (tonnes carbon per capita) 10
The saturation level is not fixed in time.

Well-being,
Life expectancy

Steinberger & Roberts 2010,

Ecological Economics.

Energy or Carbon/cap
International trend =/= deterministic development pathway.
Relation between well-being and energy/carbon itself changes. 11
35 years of stable shift in life expectancy
& energy relationship

Steinberger & Roberts 2010,

Ecological Economics (data update).
Energy & well-being: stylised fact #2
“Dynamic decline”
The energy threshold associated with any given level
of well-being decreases dramatically over time.

Steinberger, J. K. and J. T. Roberts (2010). "From constraint to sufficiency: the decoupling of 13

energy and carbon from human needs, 1975-2005." Ecological Economics 70(2): 425-433.
 Energy & well-being: stylised fact #3
“Multi-dimensional diversity”
Many types of countries (climate, geography, history) achieve
relatively high well-being at relatively low energy use.

Lamb, W. F., J. K. Steinberger, A. Bows-Larkin, G. P. Peters, J. T. Roberts and F. R. Wood (2014). "Transitions
in pathways of human development and carbon emissions." Environmental Research Letters 9(1): 014011. 14
Unsustainable consumption is usually
very energy intensive. What are
consumers getting from it?

We need to go beyond stylised facts

(and understand why these stylised
facts arise in the first place).

What conceptual and analytic

frameworks are useful here?
 A safe and just operating space for
humanity: below planetary boundaries and
above social thresholds
First of all, can we empirically test
Kate Raworth’s Doughnut?
Planetary Boundaries & Social Thresholds
Biophysical Indicators and their Boundaries
Biophysical Indicator Planetary Boundary Per Capita Boundary
CO2 Emissions 2 °C warming 1.61 t CO2 y-1
Phosphorus 6.2 Tg P y-1 0.89 kg P y-1
Nitrogen 62 Tg N y-1 8.9 kg N y-1
Blue Water 4000 km3 y-1 574 m3 y-1
eHANPP 18.2 Gt C y-1 2.62 t C y-1
Ecological Footprint 1.72 gha y-1
Material Footprint 7.2 t y-1

Social Indicators and their Thresholds

Social Indicator Threshold
Human Life Satisfaction 6.5 on 0–10 Cantril ladder scale
Well-being Healthy Life Expectancy 65 years
Nutrition 2700 kcal per capita
Sanitation 95% of people have access to improved sanitation facilities
Income 95% of people earn above $1.90 a day
Access to Energy 95% of people have electricity access
Need
Education 95% enrolment in secondary school
Satisfiers
Social Support 90% of people have friends or family they can depend on
Democracy 0.80 (approximate US/UK value)
Equality 70 on 0–100 scale (GINI index of 0.30)
Employment 94% employed (6% unemployment)

O’Neill, Fanning, Lamb & Steinberger 2018, Nature Sustainability

Selected National Results
Switzerland Sri Lanka

O’Neill, Fanning, Lamb & Steinberger 2018, Nature Sustainability

Where We
Need to Be

?
 We Have a Cool Webpage!
https://goodlife.leeds.ac.uk
How can we get within the “safe & just” doughnut space?

Living Well Within Limits

[LiLi] project factsheet
• Leverhulme Research Leadership Award
• Led by Dr Julia Steinberger,
hosted by University of Leeds
• 5 years: 2017-2021
• Interdisciplinary: not within remit of any UK
Research Council
• Website: http://lili.leeds.ac.uk
22
 Ideas that form the basis of the “Living
Well Within Limits (LiLi)” project
Stepping stones in a conceptual pathway Idea
around mainstream economics 4

Idea
1. Needs-based understanding of 3
human well-being;
2. “Satisfiers” of human needs as
flexible, culturally & historically
specific;
3. Provisioning systems and heterodox Idea
economic view of supply chains; 2

4. Energy services rather than energy

supply. Idea
1
Putting the pieces together: Living Well
Within
The LiLi framework Limits [LiLi]

BIOPHYSICAL INPUTS PROVISIONING SOCIAL OUTCOMES

SYSTEMS
Planetary Natural Physical Need Well-being
Processes Resources satisfiers
Infrastructure, Physical &
Hydrological Energy, Technology, Food & water, mental
cycle, Materials, Land use, Housing, health,
Carbon cycle, Land, Supply Chains. Healthcare, Autonomy of
Solar Water, Education, agency,
radiation, Etc. Social Relationships, Cognitive
Biodiversity, Economic understandin
Nitrogen State, security, g,
cycle, Markets, Physical Social
Etc. Communities, safety, participation,
Institutions, Childhood Life
Norms, safety, satisfaction,
Culture, Safe birth Etc.
Distribution. control &
childbearing.

O’Neill, Fanning, Lamb & Steinberger 2018, Nature Sustainability

Theory matters: social vs individual HUMAN
WELL-
assessment of well-being BEING

Most suited to sustainability Dominant in policy & research,

research, social focus individual focus
Well-being Hedonic (maximising pleasure,
Eudaimonic (flourishing)
assessment minimising pain)
 Outcomes: health, education,  Income & expenditure
political participation, etc. studies (well-being as
 Means (satisfiers): public maximising utility through
expenditure budgets on health consumption, as making
& education, available choices given budgetary
Objective
infrastructure and vital services constraints).
and/or non-
(hospitals, schools, trained
individual
doctors and teachers, etc.).
 Community participatory
method: Max-Neef’s Human-
Scale Development matrix of
needs and satisfiers.
Individual &  Happiness
subjective  Evaluative assessment (satisfaction with life)

Brand Correa & Steinberger 2017, Ecological Economics

Human Need framework: strong sust. HUMAN
WELL-
BEING

Negatively
defined
(satiable),
social goal.

Basic Needs
to allow
that goal.

Satisfiers.

Gough, 2015
Putting the pieces together: Living Well
Within
The LiLi framework Limits [LiLi]

BIOPHYSICAL INPUTS PROVISIONING SOCIAL OUTCOMES

SYSTEMS
Planetary Natural Physical Need Well-being
Processes Resources satisfiers
Infrastructure, Physical &
Hydrological Energy, Technology, Food & water, mental
cycle, Materials, Land use, Housing, health,
Carbon cycle, Land, Supply Chains. Healthcare, Autonomy of
Solar Water, Education, agency,
radiation, Etc. Social Relationships, Cognitive
Biodiversity, Economic understandin
Nitrogen State, security, g,
cycle, Markets, Physical Social
Etc. Communities, safety, Theory of participation,
Institutions, Childhood Life
Human Need
Norms, safety, satisfaction,
Culture, Safe birth Doyal & Etc.
Distribution. control & Gough 1991
childbearing.

O’Neill, Fanning, Lamb & Steinberger 2018, Nature Sustainability

 Empirical evidence that HUMAN
SATIS-
multidimensional need satisfaction is FIERS
WELL-
BEING
a pre-condition for well-being

O’Neill, Fanning, Lamb & Steinberger 2018, Nature Sustainability

 Satisfiers SATIS-
FIERS
Common concept across Human Needs approaches.

Max-Neef human-scale development matrix

BEING HAVING DOING INTERACTING
(personal or (institutions, (personal or (spaces or
collective norms, tools) collective atmospheres)
Needs: attributes) action)
Subsistence
Protection Consumption is not
the only type
Affection of need satisfier!
Understanding
Participation
Idleness
Creation
Identity
Freedom
 Gough & Max-Neef: satisfiers as SATIS-
FIERS
intermediates between needs and material
goods (=environmental impacts)
Conventional economics:
Material
goods & DIRECT RELATION Wants
services (also needs)

Human-Scale Development & Human Needs

Material
Satisfiers
Satisfiers Needs
goods & Satisfiers (universal)
services

Indirect relation:
Better for analysis and decoupling

30
 SATIS-
Satisfiers & sustainable FIERS

consumption
• Satisfiers are a key and underexplored concept
in sustainable consumption;
• The purpose is to have analytic clarity,
between the specific object consumed or form
of consumption, and the ultimate goal that
consumption serves for the consumer;
• That clarity can enable “deep decoupling”, or
at least “deeper decoupling” than focusing on
the specific object of consumption.
 Living Well
Satisfiers & provisioning systems Within
Limits [LiLi]

BIOPHYSICAL INPUTS PROVISIONING SOCIAL OUTCOMES

SYSTEMS
Planetary Natural Physical Need Well-being
Processes Resources satisfiers
Infrastructure, Physical &
Hydrological Energy, Technology, Food & water, mental
cycle, Materials, Land use, Housing, health,
Carbon cycle, Land, Supply Chains. Healthcare, Autonomy of
Solar Water, Education, agency,
radiation, Etc. Social Relationships, Cognitive
Biodiversity, Economic understandin
Nitrogen State, security, g,
cycle, Markets, Physical Social
Etc. Communities,Energy safety, participation,
Institutions,
service Childhood Life
satisfaction,
“baskets” for safety,
Norms,
Culture, Safe birth Etc.
human
Distribution. need control &
satisfaction childbearing.

O’Neill, Fanning, Lamb & Steinberger 2018, Nature Sustainability

 ENERGY SECTOR ENERGY
SERVICES
Energy services
Physical provision:
Energy Services

Source: Jochem et al 2000

END USER AND PASSIVE SYSTEM
 ENERGY
SERVICES

Cullen et al 2010
 Community level participatory research, connecting
energy services as satisfiers of human needs

ENERGY SATIS- HUMAN

SERVICES FIERS? NEEDS

Brand-Correa, Martin-Ortega & Steinberger,

2018, ERSS
35
What about the social context and
constraints of provision?
 Provisioning systems = Core mission of PROVI-
SIONING
heterodox economics SYSTEMS
• “Aristotle's oikonomy included the study and practice of diverse domains ….
It included as well the discussion of meaning and value, of ethics and
aesthetics, as an integral part of this ‘art of living and living well.’”
Cruz, Stahel & Max-Neef 2009

• “… economics is the study of the on-going economic process that

provides the flow of goods and services required by society to meet the
needs of those who participate in its activities … [Economics is] the science
of social provisioning.” Gruchy 1987

• “[The economy is] an instituted process of interaction between man and his
environment, which results in a continuous supply of want-satisfying
material means . . . The human economy, then, is embedded and enmeshed
in institutions, economic and noneconomic. The inclusion of the
noneconomic is vital. For religion or government may be as important for
the structure and functioning of the economy as monetary institutions or
the availability of tools and machines themselves that lighten the toil of
labor.” Polanyi 1968 37
 Heterodox economics & political PROVI-
SIONING
economy: Systems of Provision SYSTEMS

Fine & Leopold 1993, Fine 2002

• Structures: governance rules and
hierarchies of decision-making (key laws
and regulations, regional scales of
responsibility).
• Processes: stages of policy-making, formal
procedures for decision-making, project
development and communication between
actors.
• Agents: the most important actors
responsible for shaping provision.
• Relations: formal and informal links
between actors.
 Why do people use cars?
PROVI-
ENERGY SATIS- HUMAN
SIONING
SERVICES FIERS NEEDS
SYSTEMS

Adequate
Need: Economic Security Adequate Food
Healthcare
Need System of
1st order System of food Healthcare systems,
Satisfiers: employment,
(Sociotechnical production and location of available
division of labour,
Provisioning distribution, location doctors, relevant
location of
Systems) of retailers … clinics/hospitals …

Based on Mattioli 2016 ERSS

workplaces …
2nd order (type Supermarket food Visit to doctor or
Paid employment
or institution) shopping hospital

3rd order (Energy Passenger Road Passenger Road Passenger Road

Service) Travel Travel Travel
4th order
(Conversion Car Car Car
Device)

Conclusion: provisioning systems create car dependency.

 Understanding how energy demand is
created: the case of car dependency
1. Car
industry Energy demand
research requires
5. Car 2. Roads historical, political &
culture & parking institutional analysis
if we are to escape
high energy
consumption:
4. Neglect 3. Land not just engineering
public use for & economics.
transport cars

Mattioli et al in preparation 40
Key characteristics of the automotive industry
and implications for car dependence

Mattioli et al, in preparation

 Upcoming & ongoing LiLi research
1. Qualitative fieldwork, HUSES framework
 Lina Brand-Correa is in Zambia right now!
2. Quantitative studies (PhD’s) at three levels
1. Nation-state, over time
2. Income classes, 1 or 2 years
3. Households (6 countries: Zambia, Colombia, UK,
Vietnam, Nepal, Germany).
3. Several papers on the political economy of
electricity provision, in the UK and Zambia
4. Integration & modelling, somehow.
 Living Well
LiLi outcomes? Within
Limits [LiLi]

1. Changing terms of debate in energy studies & climate

change
– Moving from economic cost/benefit to human priorities.
– Already had impact on IPCC chapter structures, ecological
economics conference topics …
2. Establishing some (more or less?) robust connections
between disparate fields of research
– Hopefully communicating convincingly and recruiting
others along the way.
3. Obtaining research results that allow us to think & act
in new ways about climate challenge.
 Thank you.
• Any questions?
Backup slides start
Economics as the disciplinary currency of exchange
ENERGY USE HUMAN
ECONOMIC
(& Climate WELL-
ACTIVITY
Implications) BEING

What are the energy What are the economic

ALLOWED
requirements of requirements of
QUESTIONS
economic activity? human well-being?

GREEN UTILITY
Neoclassical
GROWTH THEORY
Lenses

Efficiency should Infinite, because of

ALLOWED
allow decoupling of insatiable wants and
ANSWERS
energy and economy. desires.

No evidence, ignores Contradictory

NIGGLING
rebound effect and evidence, challenges
DOUBTS
its role in growth. to utility theory.
 HUMAN
Approaches to human well-being WELL-
BEING
(Sort of) following Gasper 2004:
Confusing mix
1. Pleasure or satisfaction (Hedonic) of theory &
a. Objective: Economic utility maximisation, method &
“preferences”, satisfaction of wants & desires disciplinary
perspectives.
b. Subjective: Balance of positive & negative feelings
(maximise positive, minimise negative): happiness
c. Subjective: Life Satisfaction (can measure Eudaimonic
as well)
2. Opulence (Consumerist Hedonic)
– Objective: Material living standards, consumption.
Needs approaches are the
3. Human Needs (Eudaimonic) most promising for
– Objective: theorised, participatory and/or politically sustainability, because they
determined (Doyal & Gough 1991, Max-Neef 1991) allow intergenerational
comparisons and satiability.
4. Capabilities (Eudaimonic) ~ J O’Neill 2012
– Objective: opportunities and freedom (Sen &
Nussbaum)
LiLi research questions and outcomes
 Connecting energy supply, physical Living Well
Within
provision, services, satisfiers & needs. Limits [LiLi]

Energy Energy Satisfiers Needs

required services

Technology
& infrastr.

Choice of
provision

satisfiers
Physical
options

PRIMARY PROVI- HUMAN

ENERGY SATIS-
ENERGY SIONING WELL-
SERVICES FIERS
SYSTEMS BEING
Decoupling
Opportunities
Sustainability trilemma: can only have 2/3

50
Figure W. Lamb 2015 based on Steinberger et al 2012
 LiLi Research Questions
Research questions Analytic approach
[1] What are the biophysical resources, more Quantitative, empirical,
specifically energy, required to achieve human comparative analysis:
well-being? econometric & industrial
ecology toolkit.
[2] What influence do social and technical Qualitative, empirical,
provisioning systems have on the levels of comparative analysis:
resource use associated with well-being? political economy,
participatory & fieldwork
tookit.
[3] If remaining within planetary boundaries Scenarios & modelling:
requires rapid decreases in resource & energy participatory scenario
use, how could these scarce resources best be development, systemic
employed to enhance and preserve well-being? quantitative modelling.

51

Universal human needs
Maslow, Max-Neef, Doyal & Gough.
Culturally-specific satisfiers.
HUMAN
WELL-
BEING
Preference satisfaction
Bentham. Neoclassical economics.
Utility function maximising through
consumption of goods & services.

Well-being
Happiness 
Capabilities
Kahneman, Layard
Human development
Subjective psychological
Amartya Sen, Martha Nussbaum
assessment.
Opportunities and freedom.
Functioning within society.
Eudaimonic
Hedonic
Flourishing
Pleasure principle
Aristotle
Epicurus
52
Inspiration John O’Neill 2006, sunshine diagram from Lina Brand Correa
Theory matters: climate change HUMAN
WELL-
BEING
mitigation interlude

Lamb & Steinberger, 2017, in review`

 Income and carbon emissions:
Taking trade into account
Carbon importer

Carbon exporter
GDP ($ per capita)

Carbon neutral

CO2 emissions: R2 = 0.82

Corrected for trade: R2 = 0.90
Steinberger et al,
2012, Nature
Climate Change
54
Carbon emissions (tonnes carbon per capita)
Physical provision: energy services ENERGY
SERVICES

Following Cullen et al 2010

 “Dynamic decline”
used as a basis for emission reduction scenarios

Costa, L., D. Rybski and J. P. Kropp (2011). "A Human Development Lamb, W. F. and N. D. Rao (2015). "Human development in a
Framework for CO2 Reductions." PLoS ONE 6(12): e29262. climate-constrained world: What the past says about the
future." Global Environmental Change 33(0): 14-22.