Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter [email protected].

23
Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter [email protected]

Transcript of Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter [email protected].

Page 1: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Livia Bizikova and Laszlo [email protected]

Page 2: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Why measure?

To provide feedback on system behaviour and policy performance

To improve chances of successful adaptationTo ensure movement toward common goalsTo improve implementationTo increase accountability

Page 3: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Indicators and SDSince 1990s, SD creates opportunity and

challenges for ‘constructive ambiguity’Recognizing the links between environmental

conditions and human activitiesHighlighting the need for long-term

perspectivesConsidering equity both within and between

generationsEngaging the participation of all sectors of

society in the decision-making process

Page 4: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Steps in the integrated reporting processes

Page 5: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.
Page 6: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Australia Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories, 1994)

Page 7: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Indicators should…Be developed within an accepted conceptual

frameworkBe clearly defined and easy to understandBe subject to aggregationBe objectiveHave reasonable data requirementsBe relevant to usersBe limited in numberReflect causes, process or results

(World Bank, 1997)

Page 8: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Examples of indicator system development

Page 9: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.
Page 10: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

The partnerships in GEO accomplish the following:Ensure regional priorities and perceptions

are reflected;Provide a mechanism to aggregate

information across scale to the global level;Facilitate access to data and information;Increase policy relevance of the analysis;Help raise the profile of critical issues and

put emerging issues on the agenda;Contribute to improved policy coordination;

andProvide a quality-control mechanism.

Page 11: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Lessons from GEO for nationaland regional assessment

Assessment and reporting concepts and strategies

Stakeholders’ involvement in assessment and reporting

Report structureOrganization of reporting processCommunication of results

Page 12: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.
Page 13: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Regional indicator system for the area Regional indicator system for the area round Lake Balaton (Hungaryround Lake Balaton (Hungary))

Page 14: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.
Page 15: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Variability and change of the environment

Variability and change of the human system

Exposure unit

Ecosystem

Human system

Management and coordination of

adaptation and responses

External responseand adaptationmechanisms

Information

Influence

Page 16: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Monitoring system, evaluation reports

Implementation measures, projects

Specific adaptation measures

Data, mapserver, models, analytic tools

Priority issues and core indicators

Conceptual framework, architecture

Process / content integrationScoping

Indicator system development

Data collection and processing

Monitoring, evaluation, learning

Implementation

Development of adaptation options

ENGAGEMENT &

CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT

Integrated assessment report

Integrated assessment of trends and vulnerabilities

Scenarios, targets, action-plans

Scenario development and policy planning

Page 17: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Indicator analysis

System of 40 (at the beginning) down to 32 indicators

Indicators were analyzed based on a common template using the following questions:How is this indicator defined?What is happening in the region?How is society responding?What could be anticipated in the future?

“Failure of the week” – reporting on process

Page 18: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Developing a Sustainability Indicators Developing a Sustainability Indicators System to Measure the Well-being of System to Measure the Well-being of Winnipeg’s First Nations Community Winnipeg’s First Nations Community

Page 19: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Step in the system development

Page 20: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Well-being of the community

Page 21: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Domains of Well-being and Issues Impacting Well-being

Page 22: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

Indicators are helpful: To carry out a more profound analysis of the

socio-economic conditions on the ground;

To shift from “top-down” governance towards a regional/local policy and decision-making;

To promote task orientation, with clear and enforced definition of responsibilities for actors involved in practical application of the decisions;

To link the indicator system with development measures’ implementation to monitor the induced changes and impacts

Page 23: Livia Bizikova and Laszlo Pinter lbizikova@iisd.ca.

ChallengesData collection (numerous data-holders with

diverse format ) seems to be a challenge Accountability to the stakeholders – regular

communication

Thinking out of the box – getting to the different path then BAU

Monitoring issues that may not be significant currently