1 / 50

黃正忠 Niven Huang 社團法人中華民國企業永續發展協會 Business Council for Sustainable Development

企業與經濟體永續發展國際評比 International Sustainability Rating of Business and Economy. 黃正忠 Niven Huang 社團法人中華民國企業永續發展協會 Business Council for Sustainable Development. 企業 Ｃ orporate 道 瓊永續性群組指數 (DJSGI) Ｄ ow Jones Sustainability

karlyn
Download Presentation

黃正忠 Niven Huang 社團法人中華民國企業永續發展協會 Business Council for Sustainable Development

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 企業與經濟體永續發展國際評比 International Sustainability Rating of Business and Economy 黃正忠 Niven Huang 社團法人中華民國企業永續發展協會 Business Council for Sustainable Development

  2. 企業 Ｃorporate 道瓊永續性群組指數(DJSGI) Ｄow Jones Sustainability Group Index 經濟體 Economy 世界經濟論壇 「明日全球領袖」 任務小組所 環境永續性指數 World Economic Forum Pilot Environmental Sustainability Index BCSD-Taiwan

  3. 目的 為拓展各界對國際永續性指標評比的視野，使我國的永續發展指標系統除了考量本土特性與需求外，也能與國際評等架構接軌 台灣 在國際永續性評比的表現如何? 不是一篇專業研究的報告

  4. The BCSD-Taiwan is a coalition of 30 large companies from more than 10 sectors of industry with a shared commitment to the environment and to the principles of economic growth and sustainable development. The BCSD-Taiwan also benefits from a global network of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) representing over 1000 business leaders in developed, developing countries and countries in transition. BCSD-Taiwan

  5. What are our aims? • Business leadership- to be the leading business advocate on issues connected with the environment and sustainable development • Policy development- to participate in policy development in order to create a framework that allows business to contribute effectively to sustainable development • Best practice- to demonstrate progress in environmental and resource management in business and to share leading-edge practices among our members • Regional outreach- to contribute through our global network to a sustainable future for developing nations

  6. World Business Council for Sustainable Development The WBCSD is a coalition of 126 international companies from more than 20 sectors of industry operating in 33 countries with a shared commitment to sustainable development. The WBCSD also benefits from a regional network representing 1000 business leaders in developing countries and countries in transition. www.wbcsd.ch

  7. WBCSD THE REGIONAL NETWORK PROGRAM- BCSDs and Partner Organizations - Vernadsky Foundation Russia BCSD Poland BCSD Czech Republic BCSD Austria BCSD Croatia BCSD Latin America Confederation of Indian Industry BCSD Gulf of Mexico APEQUE Algeria BCSD Taiwan BCSD Mexico BCSD Honduras BCSD Thailand BCSD El Salvador Philippine Business for the Environment BCSD Venezuela BCSD Malaysia BCSD Costa Rica BCSD Nigeria BCSD Colombia BCSD Indonesia BCSD Brazil Environment Forum of Zimbabwe Business Council of Australia Industrial Environmental Forum of Southern Africa BCSD Argentina BCSD New Zealand

  8. Dow Jones Sustainability Group Index (DJSGI) • the world’s first global index of • sustainability-driven companies • launched in September 1999 • by Dow Jones Indexes and the • Zurich-based SAM Sustainability • Group • tracks more than 200 companies • globally

  9. Balancing Sustainability Economy Environment Equity (everyone) Triple Bottom Line

  10. 銀行業 • 保險業 • 投資基金管理公司 21世紀企業環保新驅動力

  11. 投信及專業基金Eco-Efficient Investment • 善盡社會責任的投資 • 有助於環保的投資 • 有助於永續發展的投資 • 社會公益 環保 工安衛 及人權 • 流行風從歐洲到美國再到日本

  12. 2000 9In USA, a total of US$ 2 trillion is now invested in a socially responsible manner including the investment in the proactive environmental companies, representing about 13 percent of the $16 trillion total of funds under professional management. The fastest growing component of socially responsible investing is the growth of portfolios that employ both screening and shareholder advocacy, in which shareholders use their ownership positions to mold corporate action.

  13. 1999 8 Eco-fund is becoming popular in Japan. So far, four investment trust companies launched Eco-funds. The total amount of sales is 133.2 billion yen (as of November 1999). Net assets of the Eco-funds in Japan Nikko Securities Asset Management Co., Ltd. 71.8 billion yen Yasuda Kasai Global Asset Management Co., Ltd. (YKAM) 22.0 billion yen DLIBJ Asset Management Co., Ltd. 35.0 billion yen UBS Fund Management Co., Ltd. 9.1 billion yen Total 137.9 billion yen

  14. 51999年9月初，道瓊(Dow Jones)與永續資產管理公司(Sustainable Asset Management,SAM)正式推出道瓊永續性群組指數(The Dow Jones Sustainability Group Index, DJSGI)。 根據許多研究顯示，在環保與社會公益上表現傑出的企業，投資報酬率均優於市場平均值。以過去5年的數據來看，道瓊永續性投資指數較傳統指數高出5.5%，但風險僅增加1%。 1999

  15. 1999 • 道瓊永續性指數 • 5個永續性評估準則基本架構 • 科技：產品與勞務的提供，係基於長期能有效利用資 源，並符合經濟效益的創新科技。 • 管理：管理責任、組織的能力、公司文化及與利益相關人的關係均採取高標準。 • 股東：股東可預見健全的投資報酬率、有長期經濟成長的潛力、生產力提昇、高度全球競爭力及對智慧資產有貢獻。 • 產業：公司能藉由行動示範與公開其績效，引導其產業邁向永續發展。 • 社會：對社會變遷、人口變化、社會文化改變以及長期性與持續性地的教育需求，做出適當且即時的回應。

  16. 道瓊永續性群組世界指數 • (包括了道瓊全球指數中在永續性上領先之企業) • 道瓊永續性全球指數 • 區域性指數 •  道瓊永續性群組歐洲指數 •  道瓊永續性群組北美洲指數 •  道瓊永續性群組亞太指數 • 道瓊永續性群組美國指數 • 特定化的永續性指數

  17. 特定化永續性 指數 DJSGI 世界 DJSGI 歐洲 DJSGI 北美 DJSGI 亞太 DJSGI 美國 不含煙草類股 × × × × × 不含製酒類股 × × × × × 不含賭博性類股 × × × × × 不含煙草、製酒 及賭博性類股 × × × × ×

  18. 評等架構 Dimensions: Economic Environmental. Social Sustainability Opportunities Sustainability Risks Classes: Strategy, Management, Industry Specific

  19. Opportunities Risks Economic • Strategic • -Strategic planning • - Organizational • development • Strategic • -Corporate • governance • Management • -Intellectual capital • management • -IT management and IT • integration • -Quality Management • DJSGI • - Risk and crisis • management • -Corporate codes of • conduct Industry Specific (for example) -Product recall Industry Specific (for example) -R&D spending Corporate Sustainability Assessment Criteria

  20. Environ-mental • Strategic • -Environmental • charters • Strategic • -Environmental policy • -Responsible person • for environmental • issues • Management • -Environmental, health • and Safety reporting • -Environmental profit and • loss accounting • Management • -Environmental • management system • -Environmental • performance Industry Specific (for example) -Eco-design -Eco-efficient products • Industry Specific (for example) • -Hazardous substance -Environmental • liabilities Corporate Sustainability Assessment Criteria O R

  21. Social Corporate Sustainability Assessment Criteria Strategic -Stakeholder involvement • Strategic • -Social policy • -Responsible person for • social issues Management -Social reporting -Employee benefits -Employee satisfaction -Remuneration Industry Specific (for example) -Community programs • Management • -Child labor • -Conflict resolution • -Equal rights and non- • discrimination • -Occupational health • and safety standards • - Layoffs/Freedom of • Association • -Standards for suppliers • Industry Specific (for example) • -Personnel training in • developing countries O R

  22. EVALUATION Overall weighting % Opportunities Strategy Opportunities 15 Management opportunities 20 Industry Specific opportunities 15 Risks Strategy Risks 15 Management Risks 20 Industry Specific Risks 15 Total Maximum Score100

  23. 2000 DJSGI Rating Standards Economy • BS 7799 (IT security) • ISO 9001 • ECGN, IFAC (corporate governance) Environment • EMAS • UNEP Top 50 • (reporting) • ISO 14000 • BS7750 (EMS) • CERES-GRI • ISO Guide 64 (product) • CEFIC (chemical industry) • GEMI (performance measurement • metrics) • WBCSD ( Eco-efficiency indicator) • Industry specific standards Equity (everyone) DJSGI • ILO Standards (human rights) • SA 8000 • CERES • Amnesty International • OHSAS 18001 • Fair Trade Federation • GRI • 92/241 EEC & Directive 96/34/EC • Industry specific standards Triple Bottom Line

  24. Information Sources • Company Questionnaire • CompanyDocuments • Sustainability report • Environmental reports • Health and safety reports • Social reports • Annual financial reports • Special reports on intellectual capital management and • corporate governance • All other sources of company information; e.g. internal • documentation, brochures and website. • Publicly Available Information/Stakeholder • information • Personal Contact with Companies

  25. DJSGI 2000年9月公佈的年報指出，該指數目前包含了來自27個國家，61種工業別，在永續性上績優表現前10%的公司，共有236家公司組成，總市值約5兆美元，占道瓊全球指數的19.1%。 自1999年1月至2000年6月，以美元表示，DJSGI的表現優於道瓊全球指數達127個基準點。目前已有50%的世界企業永續發展委員會(WBCSD)會員公司被評選列入此指數之中(去年為40%)。 列入道瓊永續性群組指數的公司，在2000年上半年的股東淨資盈利率(return on equity)平均為14.89%，優於道瓊傳統指數的8.43%；平均的投資報酬率為11.09%，優於道瓊傳統指數的7.37%；平均的資產報酬率為5.81%，優於道瓊傳統指數的3.63%。目前授權使用DJSGI的國家，包括比利時、法、德、盧森堡、荷、瑞典、瑞士和英國，共有17家金融企業在其金融產品中使用DJSGI 。

  26. 2000年DJSGI 236家組成公司的國家分佈 國家 公司家數 澳洲 12 奧地利 3 比利時 4 巴西 2 加拿大 16 智利 2 丹麥 4 芬蘭 6 法國 7 德國 19 國家 公司家數 希臘 3 香港 4 愛爾蘭 1 義大利 4 日本 24 馬來西亞 3 荷蘭 7 挪威 3 葡萄牙 1 南非 3 國家 公司家數 南韓 1 西班牙 4 瑞典 11 瑞士 10 泰國 1 英國 30 美國 51

  27. Taiwan

  28. Pilot Environmental Sustainability Index

  29. Pilot Environmental Sustainability Index • An initiative of the Global Leaders for Tomorrow Environment Task Force, World Economic Forum • In collaboration with: • Yale Center for Law and Environmental Policy • (YCELP) led by Daniel C. Esty • Columbia University Center for International Earth • Science Information Network (CIESIN) led by • Marc A. Levy

  30. Structure ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY INDEX COMPONENTS (5) FACTORS (21) VARIABLES (64) Hong Kong, Luxembourg, Taiwan were excluded from the prototype because they were missing more than half the variables. Data base covering 56 economies

  31. Component Logic Environment Systems 1 An economy is environmentally sustainable to the extent that its vital environmental systems are maintained at healthy levels, and to the extent to which levels are improving rather than deteriorating. Environmental Stresses And Risks 2 An economy is environmentally sustainable if the level of anthropogenic stress are low enough to engender no demonstrable harm to its environmental systems. Components of the Pilot Environmental Sustainability Index

  32. Component Logic Human Vulnerability to Environmental Impacts 3 An economy is environmentally sustainable to the extent that people and social systems are not vulnerable (in the way of health impacts, economic losses, and so on) to environmental disturbances; becoming less vulnerable is a sign that an economy is on a track to greater sustainability. Social and Institutional Capacity 4 An economy is environmentally sustainable to the extent that it has in place political institutions and underlying social patterns of skills, attitudes and networks that foster effective responses to environmental challenges.

  33. Component Logic Global Stewardship 5 An economy is environmentally sustainable if it cooperates with other countries to manage common environmental problems, and if it reduces negative environmental impacts on other countries to levels that cause no serious harm.

  34. COM-PONENT FACTOR VARIABLE YEAR NUMBER OF Countries With Data COUNTRIES WITH DATA Environ-mental systems Urban Air Quality Water Quantity Water Quality Biodiversity Land Urban NO2 concentration MRYA*1990-95 39 Urban SO2 concentration MRYA 1990-95 44 Urban particulates concentration MRYA 1990-95 38 Surface water resources per capita 1998 56 Groundwater resources per capita 1998 50 Nitrogen nitrate and nitrite concentr. MRYA 1991-96 14 Dissolved oxygen concentration MRYA 1991-96 23 Suspended solids MRYA 1991-96 21 Phosphors concentration MRYA 1991-96 16 Fecal coliform concentration MRYA 1991-96 17 Lead concentration MRYA 1991-96 18 Percentage of known plant species threatened 1994 49 Percentage of known breeding bird species threatened 1996 54 Percentage of known mammal species threatened 1996 53 Severity of human induced soil degradation 1990 52 Structure of the Pilot Environmental Sustainability Index * MRYA = Most Recent Available during the stated range

  35. Environ-mental Stresses Air Pollution Water pollution and Consumption Ecosystem Stress WasteProduction and Consumption Pressure Population SO2 emissions per land area 1995-97 27 NO emissions per land area 1995-97 26 VOC emissions per land area 1995-97 22 Coal Consumption per land area 1997 52 Number of vehicles per land area 1997 54 Fertilizer used per arable land area 1995-97 55 Industrial organic pollutants per land area 1996 44 Freshwater withdrawals as percent of renewable MRYA1985-94 41 water resources Groundwater withdrawals as a percent of annual recharge MRYA 1985-94 37 Deforestation 1990-95 55 Percentage of households with garbage collection 1993 28 Consumption pressure per capita 1995 55 Spent Nuclear Fuel Waste per capita 1991 43 Growth Rate 1995-00 1999 56 Change in population growth rate ,1990-1995 and 1995-2000 1999-2000 59

  36. Human Vulner-ability to Environ-mental Impacts Basic Sustenance Public Health Disasters Exposure Percentage of urban population with access to MRYA1990-96 29 safe drinking water Percentage of rural population with access to MRYA1990-96 28 safe drinking water Percentage of households with electricity 1993 48 Daily per capita calories supply as a percentage 1988-90 49 of total requirements Prevalence of infectious diseases MRYA1985-95 55 Infant mortality 1999 56 Deaths from natural disasters over the period 1978-98 Total 1978-98 49

  37. Social and Institu-tional Capacity Science and Technical Capacity Capacity for Rigorous Policy Debate Environmental Regulation and Management Tracking Environmental Conditions Eco-efficiency Research & Development scientists and engineers 1985-95 49 per million population Expenditure for Research & Development as a percentage of GNP 1986-95 50 Scientific and technical articles per million population 1995 56 IUCN member organizations per million population 1999 56 Civil liberties 1998-1999 56 Transparency and stability of environmental regulations 1999 56 Percentage of urban population with access to MRYA1990-98 45 adequate sanitation percent land area under protected status 1997 56 (IUCN Categories I-V) Percentage of ESI variables in publicly available data sets 1999 56 Availability of sustainable development information 1997 39 at the national level Number of GEMS water quality monitoring stations 1994-96 56 per million population Energy efficiency(total energy consumption per unit GDP) 1997 43 Hydroelectric plus renewable energy supply as a percentage of total energy produced 1997 55 Percentage increase in the supply of hydroelectric and renewable energy bet. 1990&1997 1990-97 50

  38. Social and Institu-tional Capacity Public Choice Failures Retail prices for premium gasoline 1996-98 42 Fossil fuel subsidies as a percentage of GDP 1995-96 16 Corruption Perceptions Index 1999 56 Global Steward-ship Contribution to International Cooperation Impact on global commons Number of memberships in environmental I Ntergovenmental organizations 1998 55 Percentage of total memberships in intergovermmental orgs that are environmental 1998 55 Percentage of CITES reporting requirements met 1998 53 Status of National Biodiversity Strategies & Action Plans under the CBD 1998 55 Levels of ratification under the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer 1999 56 Number of members of Forest Stewardship Council and of Marine Stewardship Council 1999 56 Forest area certified by Forest Stewardship Council 1999 56 Ecological footprint “deficit” 1995 47 Carbon-dioxide emissions 1997 56 CFC consumption 1997 56 SO2 exports 1990-96 35

  39. For every variable in the data set the team created a normalized range and scaled values from 0 (low sustainability) to 100 (high sustainability). The team has not tried to define a true or definitive “sustainability” threshold. Each country was assigned a score from 0 to 100 depending on where it fell along the continuum for that particular variable.

  40. Table 1 The Current Competitiveness Index (CCI) Company Operations and Quality of the National 1999 GDP CCI Ranking Strategy Ranking Business Environment Ranking per Capita Country (ppp adjusted) 2000 1999 1998 2000 1999 1998 2000 1999 1998 Finland 1 2 2 3 7 8 1 2 2 23,520 United States 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 33,212 Germany 3 6 4 1 5 1 6 5 8 23,661 Netherlands 4 3 3 7 8 5 3 3 4 24,126 Switzerland 5 5 9 5 2 3 10 9 10 27,286 Denmark 6 7 8 8 9 10 4 6 7 27,003 Sweden 7 4 7 6 3 4 11 7 9 23,007 United Kingdom 8 10 5 11 13 9 9 8 5 22,584 Singapore 9 12 10 15 14 12 5 12 6 28,785 Australia 10 13 15 20 19 22 7 10 12 24,990 Canada 11 8 6 16 12 15 8 4 3 26,662 Belgium 12 15 19 10 11 13 13 15 18 25,380 Austria 13 11 16 12 10 11 12 13 17 24,706 Japan 14 14 18 4 4 7 19 19 19 24,892 France 15 9 11 9 6 6 15 11 13 23,209 Hong Kong 16 21 12 23 24 17 14 18 11 23,890 Iceland 17 22 24 14 21 28 16 21 23 27,810 Israel 18 20 21 13 18 21 20 20 20 17,123 New Zealand 19 16 17 22 16 19 17 14 16 18,876 Norway 20 18 14 21 23 14 18 16 15 28,097 Taiwan 21 19 20 18 17 16 21 22 21 19,269 Ireland 22 17 13 19 20 18 22 17 14 24,483 Spain 23 23 22 24 22 18,743 22 23 23 23 Italy 24 25 26 17 15 20 26 27 27 23,000 South Africa 25 26 25 26 28 33 25 25 25 7,486 Chile 26 24 23 27 26 25 24 24 24 13,789 Korea 27 28 28 25 27 24 28 30 28 14,356 Portugal 28 29 33 35 37 48 27 26 30 17,129 Turkey 29 31 29 28 33 26 29 32 29 6,444 Malaysia 30 27 27 30 25 34 30 31 26 8,365 Brazil 31 35 35 29 32 27 32 37 39 6,461 Hungary 32 33 31 34 36 39 31 33 31 11,272 Greece 33 36 38 32 45 32 33 34 38 15,180 Czech Republic 34 41 30 41 55 31 34 36 33 13,406 Jordan 35 32 32 46 44 42 35 28 32 3,240 Slovakia 36 48 36 31 51 40 36 47 37 10,255 India 37 42 44 40 48 50 37 43 42 1,913 Mauritius 38 30 37 29 38 29 10,608 Egypt 39 43 40 44 49 47 39 42 35 3,348 Thailand 40 39 37 47 43 37 40 39 36 6,349 Poland 41 37 41 36 38 38 41 38 40 8,832 Mexico 42 34 39 42 30 29 43 35 41 7,818 Costa Rica 43 38 39 35 42 41 6,995 China 44 49 42 38 31 35 45 50 44 3,709 Argentina 45 40 34 45 39 30 44 40 34 10,698 Philippines 46 44 45 43 34 41 46 46 45 3,689 Indonesia 47 53 51 51 47 52 47 52 51 3,030 Colombia 48 52 49 48 40 43 48 53 49 7,366 Peru 49 46 47 53 56 49 51 44 46 4,649 Zimbabwe 50 45 48 56 54 46 49 45 48 2,210 El Salvador 51 47 57 46 50 48 2,938 Russia 52 55 46 33 42 45 53 55 47 6,815 Vietnam 53 50 43 50 41 36 52 49 43 1,815 Venezuela 54 51 50 49 53 44 55 51 50 8,169 Bulgaria 55 54 54 52 54 54 4,810 Ukraine 56 56 52 52 50 51 56 56 52 3,276 Ecuador 57 57 55 57 58 57 4,535 The Current Competitiveness Index

  41. GDP Per Capita Relative to Current Competitiveness Presented by Prof. Michael E. Porter WBCSD LD Meeting, Boston, 2000 Source: M.E. Porter“The Current Competitiveness Index: Measuring the Microeconomic Foundations of Prosperity” in The Global Competitiveness Report 2000, Geneva: World Economic Forum. Note: Italy also appears as a substantial overachiever, however, its results are distorted by sharp differences between Northern and Southern Italy which distorts the results.

  42. Determinants of Environmental Performance: Conceptual Framework Environmental Performance Environmental Regulatory Regime • Stringency of Standards • Air regulation • Water regulation • Toxic waste regulation • Chemical regulation • Subsidies • Government subsidies • Fossil fuel subsidies • Regulatory Enforcement • Enforcement • International agreements • Urban Particulate Concentration • Energy Inefficiency • Composite Performance Index • Regulatory Structure • Transparency • Options and compliance • Confusing and changing • Early or late • Information • Tracking of ESI variables • Availability of Sustainable development information • GEMS Monitoring Stations • Environmental Institutions • IUCN organizations per million population • Membership in intergovernmental environmental organizations Presented by Prof. Michael E. Porter WBCSD LD Meeting, Boston, 2000 Economic Competitiveness Economic and Legal Context • Administrative Infrastructure • Civil Liberties • Role of Public Sector Companies • Government Treatment of Private Sector • Property Rights • Independence of Judiciary • Irregular Payments • Irregular Payments to Judiciary • Legal Framework • Scientific & Technical Infrastructure • Scientists and Engineers • Technology Position • Institutions • Licensing of Foreign Technologies • Intellectual Property Protection • Company R&D Spending • GDP Per Capita • Growth Index • Current Competitive Index Source: D.C. Esty and M.E. Porter, “Measuring National Environmental Performance and Its Determinants,” The Global Competitiveness Report 2000, Geneva: World Economic Forum

  43. Environmental Performance by Country, Absolute Ranking* Presented by Prof. Michael E. Porter WBCSD LD Meeting, Boston, 2000 Urban Particulates Energy Usage (Per Unit GDP) (Per City Population) Country Score Country Score 1 Switzerland 0.28 1 Sweden 9.0 2 Denmark 0.33 2 Norway 10.3 3 Japan 0.34 3 France 14.2 4 Italy 0.35 4 Iceland 24.0 5 Ireland 0.37 5 New Zealand 27.3 6 Austria 0.38 6 Switzerland 30.7 7 France 0.40 7 Canada 31.3 8 Germany 0.41 8 Netherlands 40.0 9 Spain 0.43 9 Australia 43.2 10 Finland 0.44 10 Germany 43.3 11 Sweden 0.48 11 Japan 43.6 12 United Kingdom 0.49 12 Austria 45.7 13 Israel 0.49 13 Finland 49.9 14 Peru 0.56 14 Argentina 50.0 15 Portugal 0.61 15 Portugal 50.4 16 Netherlands 0.62 16 Venezuela 53.0 17 Argentina 0.63 17 Czech Republic 58.4 18 Norway 0.63 18 Denmark 61.0 19 Belgium 0.64 19 Hungary 63.7 20 Australia 0.67 20 Slovak Republic 64.5 21 Brazil 0.72 21 Spain 72.7 22 United States 0.75 22 Belgium 77.9 23 Iceland 0.76 23 Korea 83.8 24 El Salvador 0.76 24 Italy 86.9 25 New Zealand 0.81 25 Malaysia 91.6 26 Costa Rica 0.84 26 Russia 100.0 27 Chile 0.90 27 Brazil 106.2 28 Philippines 0.96 28 Colombia 120.0 29 Mexico 0.97 30 Thailand 1.00 29 Greece 178.0 31 Canada 1.01 30 Bulgaria 199.3 32 Indonesia 1.09 31 Philippines 200.0 33 Malaysia 1.19 32 Thailand 223.0 34 Korea 1.22 33 Indonesia 271.0 35 Zimbabwe 1.33 34 India 277.5 36 Jordan 1.94 35 Mexico 279.0 37 South Africa 1.98 36 China 310.8 38 Egypt 2.17 39 Venezuela 2.40 40 China 2.44 Source: D.C. Esty and M.E. Porter, “Measuring National Environmental Performance and Its Determinants,” The Global Competitiveness Report 2000, Geneva: World Economic Forum *Not all data were available for all countries

  44. Environmental Performance by Country, Ranking vs. Income Group Average Presented by Prof. Michael E. Porter WBCSD LD Meeting, Boston, 2000 Low Income Countries Medium Income Countries High Income Countries Urban Particulates Energy Usage Urban Particulates Energy Usage Urban Particulates Energy Usage (Per City Population) (Per Unit GDP) (Per City Population) (Per Unit GDP) (Per City Population) (Per Unit GDP) Country Score Country Score Country Score Country Score Country Score Country Score 1 Russia 0.47 1 Peru 0.44 1 New Zealand 0.30 1 Spain 0.41 1 Sweden 0.22 1 Switzerland 0.55 2 Brazil 0.50 2 Brazil 0.57 2 Argentina 0.55 2 Israel 0.47 2 Norway 0.25 2 Denmark 0.63 3 Bulgaria 0.94 3 El Salvador 0.60 3 Portugal 0.55 3 Portugal 0.57 3 France 0.35 3 Japan 0.66 4 Philippines 0.95 4 Costa Rica 0.67 4 Venezuela 0.58 4 Argentina 0.60 4 Iceland 0.59 4 Italy 0.67 5 Thailand 1.06 5 Philippines 0.77 5 Czech Rep. 0.64 5 New Zealand 0.76 5 Switzerland 0.75 5 Ireland 0.72 6 Indonesia 1.28 6 Thailand 0.80 6 Hungary 0.69 6 Chile 0.85 6 Canada 0.77 6 Austria 0.73 7 India 1.32 7 Indonesia 0.87 7 Slovak Rep. 0.70 7 Mexico 0.92 7 Netherlands 0.98 7 France 0.77 8 China 1.47 8 Zimbabwe 1.06 8 Spain 0.79 8 Malaysia 1.13 8 Australia 1.06 8 Germany 0.79 9 Jordan 1.54 9 Korea 0.91 9 Korea 1.15 9 Germany 1.06 9 Finland 0.85 10 Egypt 1.73 10 Malaysia 1.00 10 South Africa 1.87 10 Japan 1.07 10 Sweden 0.92 11 China 1.94 11 Colombia 1.31 11 Venezuela 2.27 11 Austria 1.12 11 UK 0.94 12 Greece 1.94 12 Finland 1.23 12 Netherlands 1.20 13 Mexico 3.04 13 Denmark 1.50 13 Norway 1.22 14 Belgium 1.91 14 Belgium 1.23 15 Italy 2.13 15 Australia 1.29 16 USA 1.45 17 Iceland 1.46 18 Canada 1.94 Source: D.C. Esty and M.E. Porter, “Measuring National Environmental Performance and Its Determinants,” The Global Competitiveness Report 2000, Geneva: World Economic Forum

  45. Environmental Regulatory Regime Index by Country, Absolute Ranking Presented by Prof. Michael E. Porter WBCSD LD Meeting, Boston, 2000 Country Rank Score Rank Country Score 1 Finland 1.998 28 Jordan -0.261 2 Norway 1.741 29 Hungary -0.280 3 Switzerland 1.637 30 Mexico -0.341 4 Netherlands 1.623 31 Chile -0.410 5 Denmark 1.536 32 Argentina -0.461 6 Austria 1.323 33 Czech Republic -0.488 7 Sweden 1.236 34 Slovak Republic -0.539 8 Germany 1.205 35 Greece -0.558 9 United States 1.190 36 Poland -0.569 10 United Kingdom 1.087 37 Costa Rica -0.614 11 Canada 1.073 38 Russia -0.652 12 Japan 1.050 39 Thailand -0.665 13 Belgium 1.041 40 China -0.690 14 Australia 1.006 41 Peru -0.720 15 France 0.898 42 Egypt -0.757 16 New Zealand 0.855 43 India -0.881 17 Ireland 0.712 44 Colombia -0.922 18 Iceland 0.536 45 Indonesia -1.037 19 Spain 0.422 46 Mauritius -1.167 20 Korea 0.145 47 Philippines -1.193 21 Portugal 0.083 48 Ukraine -1.322 22 Israel 0.063 49 Vietnam -1.349 23 Italy 0.035 50 Zimbabwe -1.353 24 Malaysia -0.082 51 Venezuela -1.371 25 Brazil -0.095 52 Bulgaria -1.563 26 Hong Kong -0.128 53 El Salvador -1.777 27 South Africa -0.250 Source: D.C. Esty and M.E. Porter, “Measuring National Environmental Performance and Its Determinants,” The Global Competitiveness Report 2000, Geneva: World Economic Forum

  46. Environmental Regulatory Regime Index by Country, Ranking vs. Income Group Average Presented by Prof. Michael E. Porter WBCSD LD Meeting, Boston, 2000 Low Income Countries Middle Income Countries High Income Countries Rank Country Score Rank Country Score Rank Country Score 1 Brazil 2.034 1 New Zealand 2.710 1 Finland 1.424 2 Jordan 2.000 2 Ireland 1.521 2 Denmark 0.921 3 Russia 0.778 3 Spain 0.979 3 Switzerland 0.877 4 Egypt 0.516 4 Korea 0.586 4 Netherlands 0.775 5 China 0.353 5 Portugal 0.501 5 Norway 0.587 6 Colombia 0.327 6 Israel 0.455 6 Sweden 0.507 7 Thailand 0.157 7 Malaysia 0.306 7 Austria 0.462 8 Peru 0.152 8 South Africa 0.012 8 Germany 0.323 9 India -0.219 9 Czech Republic -0.078 9 Canada 0.215 10 Bulgaria -0.466 10 Slovak Republic -0.219 10 Australia 0.149 11 Zimbabwe -0.493 11 Mexico -0.266 11 United Kingdom 0.077 12 Indonesia -0.505 12 Chile -0.275 12 Japan 0.019 13 Philippines -0.620 13 Costa Rica -0.473 13 United States 0.012 14 Ukraine -0.841 14 Greece -0.598 14 Belgium -0.116 15 Vietnam -1.295 15 Poland -0.678 15 France -0.262 16 El Salvador -1.879 16 Argentina -0.896 16 Iceland -0.685 17 Mauritius -1.323 17 Italy -1.517 18 Venezuela -2.265 18 Hong Kong -1.766 19 Hungary -2.002 Source: D.C. Esty and M.E. Porter, “Measuring National Environmental Performance and Its Determinants,” The Global Competitiveness Report 2000, Geneva: World Economic Forum

  47. Presented by Prof. Michael E. Porter WBCSD LD Meeting, Boston, 2000 Source: D.C. Esty and M.E. Porter, “Measuring National Environmental Performance and Its Determinants,” The Global Competitiveness Report 2000, Geneva: World Economic Forum

  48. Presented by Prof. Michael E. Porter WBCSD LD Meeting, Boston, 2000 Source: D.C. Esty and M.E. Porter, “Measuring National Environmental Performance and Its Determinants,” The Global Competitiveness Report 2000, Geneva: World Economic Forum

  49. Taiwan

  50. 結 論 • 多參考國際永行續性評比的指標與架構 • 系統性建立我國永續性相關數據資料庫 • 建立我國永續性指標系統與企業界互動的機制

More Related