1. Work with policy to define greener goals

The relationship between efficiency and sustainability

We might say that efficiency gains are helping to reduce environmental impacts, but we need to be careful of describing all services that have found some efficiencies and reduced waste as ‘sustainable’.

Defining sustainability - environmental, social and economic aspects

The most commonly referenced definition of ‘sustainability’ comes from the UN's Our Common Future report published in 1987, often referred to as the Brundtland report:

'Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.’

Crucially these needs were described in terms of economic, social and environmental terms, and these 3 aspects of sustainability are arguably best captured in the Sustainable Development Goals.

When can an efficient service be considered an environmentally sustainable one?

In order to be labelled environmentally sustainable, the service needs to be doing enough to align with the transition we need:

• Are the reductions in carbon footprint from the service in line with departmental and national targets around net zero and the trajectory needed by 2030, 2040, 2050?

• Are impacts on other resource consumption (water use, land use change etc) helping us to transition to a world where we are not compromising the needs of future generations?

Combining environmental and other aspects of sustainability

A government service could be very resource efficient, and thus reducing the carbon footprint of what it replaces, and so ‘environmentally sustainable’. It could simultaneously deliver social or economic benefit, for example helping people access education or healthcare.

The centrality of the service offering

The service offering is crucial to the question of sustainable services: while not usually relevant for government, if a service is efficient in itself but enables unsustainable user behaviours then it should not be considered sustainable.

Looking beyond carbon for broader environmental impacts

Measuring the 'carbon footprint' (the greenhouse gas emissions produced by something often expressed in terms of carbon dioxide equivalence) may be the most appropriate / practical environmental measure if choosing just one for a service.

However, we should also be aware of 'carbon tunnel vision' where a focus on driving down carbon at all costs may lead to increased water usage, land use, local air pollution etc. This is a reason we might need to consider measuring other impacts, where appropriate.

• Guide to Indicators, Sustainable Development Goals Progress Tracker

• Life cycle assessments: ’Going beyond carbon: An Earth System Impact Score? Science Direct

Could an ineffecient service still deliver net environmental benefit?

There are some circumstances when a service that is not efficient or to be considered ‘green’ in and of itself can deliver net environmental benefit.

For example: A resource intensive service that enabled farmers to produce more food whilst simultaneously reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the process might still be labelled as ‘net’ benefit.