Preview
IB DP ESS — Topic 1: Foundations | SL & HL | Paper 1 & Paper 2A/2B
🎯 Learning Intentions By the end of this note, you will be able to:
- Define sustainability, ecological footprint, biocapacity, and the Human Development Index (HDI) using IB-aligned ESS terminology.
- Explain how ecological footprints are calculated and what they reveal about the relationship between human consumption and planetary limits.
- Describe the strengths and limitations of a range of sustainability indicators, including the HDI, Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), and Happy Planet Index (HPI).
- Distinguish between GDP as a measure of economic output and composite indicators that attempt to capture human well-being and environmental sustainability.
- Analyse patterns in ecological footprint and biocapacity data across different countries and regions, applying the ESS parameters of scale, perspectives, and trade-offs.
- Evaluate the effectiveness of sustainability indicators in guiding environmental policy and decision-making at national and global scales.
- Discuss contrasting worldviews — ecocentric, technocentric, and anthropocentric — in relation to how societies define and measure sustainability.
Real-World Context & Relevance
On 2 August 2023, humanity crossed a threshold that should have prompted global alarm: Earth Overshoot Day. This is the date each year on which humanity has consumed more from nature than the planet can renew in an entire year. By that single date, we had used the equivalent of 1.7 Earths worth of biological resources — fish, forests, clean water, carbon absorption capacity — in just seven months. The remaining five months of 2023 were spent in ecological debt, drawing down the natural capital that future generations depend upon (Global Footprint Network, "Earth Overshoot Day 2023").
Yet if you looked only at global GDP figures for 2023, you would see a world economy growing at approximately 3.1%, with rising incomes in many regions. The contradiction is stark: conventional economic metrics suggest progress while ecological metrics signal overshoot. This tension — between what we measure and what actually matters for long-term sustainability — is precisely why ESS dedicates significant attention to sustainability indicators. How we measure sustainability shapes the policies governments adopt, the investments corporations make, and the futures communities can expect.
Consider two contrasting nations: Qatar and Costa Rica. Qatar has one of the world's highest GDPs per capita (approximately USD 83,000 in 2022) and one of the world's largest ecological footprints per person — roughly 14.4 global hectares (gha) per capita, against a global biocapacity of approximately 1.6 gha per person. Costa Rica, by contrast, has a per capita income roughly one-tenth of Qatar's, yet consistently ranks among the top performers on the Happy Planet Index, combining high life expectancy, high well-being scores, and a per capita footprint of around 2.7 gha. These two nations illustrate that wealth, well-being, and ecological sustainability are not the same thing — and that choosing the right indicator matters enormously.
🌍 Why This Matters Sustainability indicators are not merely academic tools — they are the instruments through which governments, international organisations, and communities decide whether development is genuinely sustainable or simply profitable in the short term. Choosing the wrong indicator can mask ecological collapse, entrench inequality, and delay the systemic changes needed to keep human societies within planetary boundaries.
Core Concepts & Definitions
Before we can measure sustainability, we must understand what we are trying to sustain. The concept emerged from the 1987 Brundtland Commission report, which recognised that human development was eroding the very ecological foundations it depended upon. The Commission's response was not to halt development but to redefine it — to ask whether development could meet present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own.
📖 Key