Tech
The Green Future Index 2022
Published
3 years agoon
By
Terry Power
The Green Future Index is a ranking of 76 countries and territories on their progress and commitment toward building a low carbon future. It measures the degree to which their economies are pivoting to clean energy, industry, agriculture, and society through innovation, policy, and investment in renewables.
The research for The Green Future Index 2022 concluded in January 2022, prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. That conflict is likely to have far-reaching and ongoing implications for the sustainability efforts of countries all around the world. While MIT Technology Review Insights has attempted to relay the most accurate information possible, we can expect the economic, social, and political climate to continue to shift.
The Green Future Index 2022 is the second annual comparative ranking of 76 nations and territories (representing about 95% of global GDP) on their ability to develop a sustainable, low-carbon future for their economies and societies. As it was in its inaugural year, the index was developed through in-depth primary and secondary research processes. Secondary research included the review of several hundred articles, research reports and papers in scientific literature, and news and legal analysis journals. Primary research was conducted through more than 20 in-depth interviews with global experts on climate change, green energy, and decarbonization technologies.
This research process informed our evaluation and selection of 22 distinct sets of country-level data to comprise the indicators of the index. The data came from a wide range of publicly available sources, including the International Energy Agency (IEA), the International Renewable Energy Agency, the World Bank, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Association (FAO), the World Intellectual Property Organization, and the Climate Action Tracker (CAT).
Where it was necessary to fill in gaps, we expanded and refined existing datasets by conducting additional detailed research on selected countries and consulted with global experts. This was done in the climate policy and carbon finance initiatives indicators, and in new indicators added to this year’s index, specifically in defining carbon capture and sequestration “readiness” and in developing estimates for the penetration of electric vehicles (see the section “What is different in the 2022 Green Future Index?”).
The indicator datasets were turned into ranked scores in one of two ways. For quantitative metrics, such as growth rates or values, each data point for each country was scaled up or down using minimum-maximum normalization to develop a range of scores across all countries for that indicator. For data that was largely qualitative or non-standard, a ranking categorization system was developed, and each country was assigned a score. Once all 22 indicators were scored, they were organized into five separate pillars. The structure of this second edition of the Green Future Index remains largely the same as the 2021 edition, with a few indicators added to augment its coverage of sustainable activities (see the section “What is different in the 2022 Green Future Index?”)
Pillar 1: Carbon emissions – This pillar measures how effectively countries are curbing carbon dioxide emissions overall, as well as in key sectors. The indicators within this pillar are:
- Total carbon dioxide emissions in 2019, in millions of tons, relative to GDP
- Average annual change in carbon dioxide emissions between 2014 and 2019, both in total, and for each of the industry, transportation, and agriculture sectors
Pillar 2: Energy transition– This pillar assesses the contribution and growth rate of renewable energy sources, and now includes nuclear power. The indicators within this pillar are:
- The growth of renewable energy production in gigawatt-hours between 2014 and 2019
- The percentage that energy from renewable sources made up in final energy consumption in 2018
- The growth of nuclear energy production in gigawatt-hours between 2014 and 2019
- The percentage that energy from nuclear generation made up in final energy consumption in 2018
Pillar 3: Green society – This pillar measures the efforts made by government, industry, and society to promote green practices. The indicators measure:
- The number of LEED-certified green buildings in 2020, per million urban population
- The percentage of solid waste that is recycled as a percentage of total waste managed
- The net change in forestation between 2015 and 2020: an indicator that combines the change in acreage of forested land through naturally regenerated primary growth, and changes through planned afforestation projects
- The stock electric passenger vehicles per million urban population in 2020
Pillar 4: Clean innovation – This pillar measures the innovation environment for building alow-carbon future, such as the relative penetration of green patents, investment in cross-border clean energy, and investment in food technology. The indicators measure:
- Growth in green intellectual property, measured by the increase in patents registered for sustainable technologies or processes and solutions between 2013 and 2018, relative to GDP
- The amount of investment a country received and provided for clean energy efforts between 2014 and 2018, as a percentage of GDP
- The number of food technology (“foodtech”) startups per million of urban population
Pillar 5: Climate policy – This pillar measures the ambition and effectiveness of climate policy, including carbon financing initiatives, sustainable agriculture policy, and the use of pandemic recovery spending to achieve a green economic recovery. The indicators include:
- A qualitative evaluation of policy action to reach stated climate goals in compliance with the Paris Agreement and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)
- A qualitative evaluation of policy and regulatory frameworks to promote carbon capture and sequestration efforts (CCS)
- A qualitative assessment of measures taken by each country to create financial incentives for firms and investors to assign a cost to carbon emissions, through the levying of carbon taxes and the creation of a market for carbon bonds and emissions trading systems
- A qualitative assessment of sustainable agriculture policies, assessing for comprehensiveness and effectiveness of implementation
- An assessment of the degree to which covid-19 recovery stimulus packages will accelerate decarbonization, resulting in a “pandemic pivot” along two measures:
- Energy transition impact—scoring countries by the proportion of stimulus spending directed at new energy initiatives versus fossil fuel projects
- Green stimulus initiatives—Scoring countries by the percentage of total stimulus spending allocated to sustainable, low-carbon key public infrastructure projects (such as transport, water, public spaces, and information)
These pillars are constructed to comprehensively evaluate each country’s green future across two dimensions: the progress they have made on achieving carbon reduction goals and other climate-friendly societal activities, and the ambitions that the country must achieve to maintain a carbon-neutral economy. The first four “progress pillars” account for 60% of the weighting in the index. The fifth pillar—climate policy—measures the extent to which investment and policy activities are channeled into green infrastructure initiatives and legislation frameworks. These factors, we believe, collectively provide the primary impetus toward establishing and sustaining a country’s green future, and thus this pillar accounts for 40% of the Index weighting.
MIT Technology Review was founded at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1899. We are a leading voice on climate change issues with a dedicated topic area on our website for the global climate emergency, including innovations that may accelerate decarbonization and national climate policy initiatives.
MIT Technology Review Insights is the custom publishing division of MIT Technology Review. We conduct qualitative and quantitative research and analysis worldwide and publish a wide variety of content, including articles, reports, infographics, videos, and podcasts.
If you have any comments or queries, please get in touch .
You may like
My senior spring in high school, I decided to defer my MIT enrollment by a year. I had always planned to take a gap year, but after receiving the silver tube in the mail and seeing all my college-bound friends plan out their classes and dorm decor, I got cold feet. Every time I mentioned my plans, I was met with questions like “But what about school?” and “MIT is cool with this?”
Yeah. MIT totally is. Postponing your MIT start date is as simple as clicking a checkbox.
Now, having finished my first year of classes, I’m really grateful that I stuck with my decision to delay MIT, as I realized that having a full year of unstructured time is a gift. I could let my creative juices run. Pick up hobbies for fun. Do cool things like work at an AI startup and teach myself how to create latte art. My favorite part of the year, however, was backpacking across Europe. I traveled through Austria, Slovakia, Russia, Spain, France, the UK, Greece, Italy, Germany, Poland, Romania, and Hungary.
Moreover, despite my fear that I’d be losing a valuable year, traveling turned out to be the most productive thing I could have done with my time. I got to explore different cultures, meet new people from all over the world, and gain unique perspectives that I couldn’t have gotten otherwise. My travels throughout Europe allowed me to leave my comfort zone and expand my understanding of the greater human experience.
“In Iceland there’s less focus on hustle culture, and this relaxed approach to work-life balance ends up fostering creativity. This was a wild revelation to a bunch of MIT students.”
When I became a full-time student last fall, I realized that StartLabs, the premier undergraduate entrepreneurship club on campus, gives MIT undergrads a similar opportunity to expand their horizons and experience new things. I immediately signed up. At StartLabs, we host fireside chats and ideathons throughout the year. But our flagship event is our annual TechTrek over spring break. In previous years, StartLabs has gone on TechTrek trips to Germany, Switzerland, and Israel. On these fully funded trips, StartLabs members have visited and collaborated with industry leaders, incubators, startups, and academic institutions. They take these treks both to connect with the global startup sphere and to build closer relationships within the club itself.
Most important, however, the process of organizing the TechTrek is itself an expedited introduction to entrepreneurship. The trip is entirely planned by StartLabs members; we figure out travel logistics, find sponsors, and then discover ways to optimize our funding.
In organizing this year’s trip to Iceland, we had to learn how to delegate roles to all the planners and how to maintain morale when making this trip a reality seemed to be an impossible task. We woke up extra early to take 6 a.m. calls with Icelandic founders and sponsors. We came up with options for different levels of sponsorship, used pattern recognition to deduce the email addresses of hundreds of potential contacts at organizations we wanted to visit, and all got scrappy with utilizing our LinkedIn connections.
And as any good entrepreneur must, we had to learn how to be lean and maximize our resources. To stretch our food budget, we planned all our incubator and company visits around lunchtime in hopes of getting fed, played human Tetris as we fit 16 people into a six-person Airbnb, and emailed grocery stores to get their nearly expired foods for a discount. We even made a deal with the local bus company to give us free tickets in exchange for a story post on our Instagram account.
Tech
The Download: spying keyboard software, and why boring AI is best
Published
1 year agoon
22 August 2023By
Terry Power
This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.
How ubiquitous keyboard software puts hundreds of millions of Chinese users at risk
For millions of Chinese people, the first software they download onto devices is always the same: a keyboard app. Yet few of them are aware that it may make everything they type vulnerable to spying eyes.
QWERTY keyboards are inefficient as many Chinese characters share the same latinized spelling. As a result, many switch to smart, localized keyboard apps to save time and frustration. Today, over 800 million Chinese people use third-party keyboard apps on their PCs, laptops, and mobile phones.
But a recent report by the Citizen Lab, a University of Toronto–affiliated research group, revealed that Sogou, one of the most popular Chinese keyboard apps, had a massive security loophole. Read the full story.
—Zeyi Yang
Why we should all be rooting for boring AI
Earlier this month, the US Department of Defense announced it is setting up a Generative AI Task Force, aimed at “analyzing and integrating” AI tools such as large language models across the department. It hopes they could improve intelligence and operational planning.
But those might not be the right use cases, writes our senior AI reporter Melissa Heikkila. Generative AI tools, such as language models, are glitchy and unpredictable, and they make things up. They also have massive security vulnerabilities, privacy problems, and deeply ingrained biases.
Applying these technologies in high-stakes settings could lead to deadly accidents where it’s unclear who or what should be held responsible, or even why the problem occurred. The DoD’s best bet is to apply generative AI to more mundane things like Excel, email, or word processing. Read the full story.
This story is from The Algorithm, Melissa’s weekly newsletter giving you the inside track on all things AI. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every Monday.
The ice cores that will let us look 1.5 million years into the past
To better understand the role atmospheric carbon dioxide plays in Earth’s climate cycles, scientists have long turned to ice cores drilled in Antarctica, where snow layers accumulate and compact over hundreds of thousands of years, trapping samples of ancient air in a lattice of bubbles that serve as tiny time capsules.
By analyzing those cores, scientists can connect greenhouse-gas concentrations with temperatures going back 800,000 years. Now, a new European-led initiative hopes to eventually retrieve the oldest core yet, dating back 1.5 million years. But that impressive feat is still only the first step. Once they’ve done that, they’ll have to figure out how they’re going to extract the air from the ice. Read the full story.
—Christian Elliott
This story is from the latest edition of our print magazine, set to go live tomorrow. Subscribe today for as low as $8/month to ensure you receive full access to the new Ethics issue and in-depth stories on experimental drugs, AI assisted warfare, microfinance, and more.
The must-reads
I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.
1 How AI got dragged into the culture wars
Fears about ‘woke’ AI fundamentally misunderstand how it works. Yet they’re gaining traction. (The Guardian)
+ Why it’s impossible to build an unbiased AI language model. (MIT Technology Review)
2 Researchers are racing to understand a new coronavirus variant
It’s unlikely to be cause for concern, but it shows this virus still has plenty of tricks up its sleeve. (Nature)
+ Covid hasn’t entirely gone away—here’s where we stand. (MIT Technology Review)
+ Why we can’t afford to stop monitoring it. (Ars Technica)
3 How Hilary became such a monster storm
Much of it is down to unusually hot sea surface temperatures. (Wired $)
+ The era of simultaneous climate disasters is here to stay. (Axios)
+ People are donning cooling vests so they can work through the heat. (Wired $)
4 Brain privacy is set to become important
Scientists are getting better at decoding our brain data. It’s surely only a matter of time before others want a peek. (The Atlantic $)
+ How your brain data could be used against you. (MIT Technology Review)
5 How Nvidia built such a big competitive advantage in AI chips
Today it accounts for 70% of all AI chip sales—and an even greater share for training generative models. (NYT $)
+ The chips it’s selling to China are less effective due to US export controls. (Ars Technica)
+ These simple design rules could turn the chip industry on its head. (MIT Technology Review)
6 Inside the complex world of dissociative identity disorder on TikTok
Reducing stigma is great, but doctors fear people are self-diagnosing or even imitating the disorder. (The Verge)
7 What TikTok might have to give up to keep operating in the US
This shows just how hollow the authorities’ purported data-collection concerns really are. (Forbes)
8 Soldiers in Ukraine are playing World of Tanks on their phones
It’s eerily similar to the war they are themselves fighting, but they say it helps them to dissociate from the horror. (NYT $)
9 Conspiracy theorists are sharing mad ideas on what causes wildfires
But it’s all just a convoluted way to try to avoid having to tackle climate change. (Slate $)
10 Christie’s accidentally leaked the location of tons of valuable art
Seemingly thanks to the metadata that often automatically attaches to smartphone photos. (WP $)
Quote of the day
“Is it going to take people dying for something to move forward?”
—An anonymous air traffic controller warns that staffing shortages in their industry, plus other factors, are starting to threaten passenger safety, the New York Times reports.
The big story
Inside effective altruism, where the far future counts a lot more than the present
October 2022
Since its birth in the late 2000s, effective altruism has aimed to answer the question “How can those with means have the most impact on the world in a quantifiable way?”—and supplied methods for calculating the answer.
It’s no surprise that effective altruisms’ ideas have long faced criticism for reflecting white Western saviorism, alongside an avoidance of structural problems in favor of abstract math. And as believers pour even greater amounts of money into the movement’s increasingly sci-fi ideals, such charges are only intensifying. Read the full story.
—Rebecca Ackermann
We can still have nice things
A place for comfort, fun and distraction in these weird times. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line or tweet ’em at me.)
+ Watch Andrew Scott’s electrifying reading of the 1965 commencement address ‘Choose One of Five’ by Edith Sampson.
+ Here’s how Metallica makes sure its live performances ROCK. ($)
+ Cannot deal with this utterly ludicrous wooden vehicle.
+ Learn about a weird and wonderful new instrument called a harpejji.
Tech
Why we should all be rooting for boring AI
Published
1 year agoon
22 August 2023By
Terry Power
This story originally appeared in The Algorithm, our weekly newsletter on AI. To get stories like this in your inbox first, sign up here.
I’m back from a wholesome week off picking blueberries in a forest. So this story we published last week about the messy ethics of AI in warfare is just the antidote, bringing my blood pressure right back up again.
Arthur Holland Michel does a great job looking at the complicated and nuanced ethical questions around warfare and the military’s increasing use of artificial-intelligence tools. There are myriad ways AI could fail catastrophically or be abused in conflict situations, and there don’t seem to be any real rules constraining it yet. Holland Michel’s story illustrates how little there is to hold people accountable when things go wrong.
Last year I wrote about how the war in Ukraine kick-started a new boom in business for defense AI startups. The latest hype cycle has only added to that, as companies—and now the military too—race to embed generative AI in products and services.
Earlier this month, the US Department of Defense announced it is setting up a Generative AI Task Force, aimed at “analyzing and integrating” AI tools such as large language models across the department.
The department sees tons of potential to “improve intelligence, operational planning, and administrative and business processes.”
But Holland Michel’s story highlights why the first two use cases might be a bad idea. Generative AI tools, such as language models, are glitchy and unpredictable, and they make things up. They also have massive security vulnerabilities, privacy problems, and deeply ingrained biases.
Applying these technologies in high-stakes settings could lead to deadly accidents where it’s unclear who or what should be held responsible, or even why the problem occurred. Everyone agrees that humans should make the final call, but that is made harder by technology that acts unpredictably, especially in fast-moving conflict situations.
Some worry that the people lowest on the hierarchy will pay the highest price when things go wrong: “In the event of an accident—regardless of whether the human was wrong, the computer was wrong, or they were wrong together—the person who made the ‘decision’ will absorb the blame and protect everyone else along the chain of command from the full impact of accountability,” Holland Michel writes.
The only ones who seem likely to face no consequences when AI fails in war are the companies supplying the technology.
It helps companies when the rules the US has set to govern AI in warfare are mere recommendations, not laws. That makes it really hard to hold anyone accountable. Even the AI Act, the EU’s sweeping upcoming regulation for high-risk AI systems, exempts military uses, which arguably are the highest-risk applications of them all.
While everyone is looking for exciting new uses for generative AI, I personally can’t wait for it to become boring.
Amid early signs that people are starting to lose interest in the technology, companies might find that these sorts of tools are better suited for mundane, low-risk applications than solving humanity’s biggest problems.
Applying AI in, for example, productivity software such as Excel, email, or word processing might not be the sexiest idea, but compared to warfare it’s a relatively low-stakes application, and simple enough to have the potential to actually work as advertised. It could help us do the tedious bits of our jobs faster and better.
Boring AI is unlikely to break as easily and, most important, won’t kill anyone. Hopefully, soon we’ll forget we’re interacting with AI at all. (It wasn’t that long ago when machine translation was an exciting new thing in AI. Now most people don’t even think about its role in powering Google Translate.)
That’s why I’m more confident that organizations like the DoD will find success applying generative AI in administrative and business processes.
Boring AI is not morally complex. It’s not magic. But it works.
Deeper Learning
AI isn’t great at decoding human emotions. So why are regulators targeting the tech?
Amid all the chatter about ChatGPT, artificial general intelligence, and the prospect of robots taking people’s jobs, regulators in the EU and the US have been ramping up warnings against AI and emotion recognition. Emotion recognition is the attempt to identify a person’s feelings or state of mind using AI analysis of video, facial images, or audio recordings.
But why is this a top concern? Western regulators are particularly concerned about China’s use of the technology, and its potential to enable social control. And there’s also evidence that it simply does not work properly. Tate Ryan-Mosley dissected the thorny questions around the technology in last week’s edition of The Technocrat, our weekly newsletter on tech policy.
Bits and Bytes
Meta is preparing to launch free code-generating software
A version of its new LLaMA 2 language model that is able to generate programming code will pose a stiff challenge to similar proprietary code-generating programs from rivals such as OpenAI, Microsoft, and Google. The open-source program is called Code Llama, and its launch is imminent, according to The Information. (The Information)
OpenAI is testing GPT-4 for content moderation
Using the language model to moderate online content could really help alleviate the mental toll content moderation takes on humans. OpenAI says it’s seen some promising first results, although the tech does not outperform highly trained humans. A lot of big, open questions remain, such as whether the tool can be attuned to different cultures and pick up context and nuance. (OpenAI)
Google is working on an AI assistant that offers life advice
The generative AI tools could function as a life coach, offering up ideas, planning instructions, and tutoring tips. (The New York Times)
Two tech luminaries have quit their jobs to build AI systems inspired by bees
Sakana, a new AI research lab, draws inspiration from the animal kingdom. Founded by two prominent industry researchers and former Googlers, the company plans to make multiple smaller AI models that work together, the idea being that a “swarm” of programs could be as powerful as a single large AI model. (Bloomberg)