Abstract

While quality of life (QOL) is the result of satisfying human needs, our current provision strategies result in global environmental degradation. To ensure sustainable QOL, we need to understand the environmental impact of human needs satisfaction. In this paper we deconstruct QOL, and apply the fundamental human needs framework developed by Max-Neef et al to calculate the carbon and energy footprints of subsistence, protection, creation, freedom, leisure, identity, understanding and participation. We find that half of global carbon emissions are driven by subsistence and protection. A similar amount are due to freedom, identity, creation and leisure together, whereas understanding and participation jointly account for less than 4% of global emissions. We use 35 objective and subjective indicators to evaluate human needs satisfaction and their associated carbon footprints across nations. We find that the relationship between QOL and environmental impact is more complex than previously identified through aggregated or single indicators. Satisfying needs such as protection, identity and leisure is generally not correlated with their corresponding footprints. In contrast, the likelihood of satisfying needs for understanding, creation, participation and freedom, increases steeply when moving from low to moderate emissions, and then stagnates. Most objective indicators show a threshold trend with respect to footprints, but most subjective indicators show no relationship, except for freedom and creation. Our study signals the importance of considering both subjective and objective satisfaction to assess QOL-impact relationships at the needs level. In this way, resources could be strategically invested where they strongly relate to social outcomes, and spared where non-consumption satisfiers could be more effective. Through this approach, decoupling human needs satisfaction from environmental damage becomes more attainable.

Highlights

  • While quality of life (QOL) is the result of satisfying human needs, our current provision strategies result in global environmental degradation

  • For 20 out of 35 relationships investigated, we find no correlation between the carbon footprint of human needs and their satisfaction

  • We find that energy and carbon footprints yield similar results, but this might no longer hold in a low-carbon energy future

Read more

Summary

Objective indicators

Democracy index, Non-obese adults, Long term employment, Inverse homicide rate, Inverse fertility rate, Access to sanitation, Access to modern fuels, Access to electricity, Global creativity index, Institutional freedom, Income equality, Residual free time, Increased knowledge, Education Index, Reading comprehension. The low intensity of wealthy nations is counteracted by consumption volume, resulting in 2-7 times higher footprints, compared to the poorest nations, e.g., twice the carbon footprint for understanding and participation, 4 times higher for subsistence and up 7 times higher for protection and leisure (Fig 3c). These trends point to the role of economic development in lowering the carbon intensity of human needs[9,10].

Findings
Objective pte
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call