Session III: Discussion on other issues related to the projects Chairman 4: Mr. Rosidi Ali
Annex 4 Final Draft
VII. FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS TO PROMOTE THE USE OF INDICATORS
29. It is proposed that SEAFDEC should assist member countries to promote the use of these guidelines and strengthen human resource capacity building.
30. Member countries should promote familiarization on the use of indicators for fisheries management to the stakeholders.
31. Member countries should further improve and develop new indicators as required.
CoreGroupMeeting ontheIdentificationofIndicatorsforthe
SustainableDevelopmentandManagementofCaptureFisheriesintheASEANRegion
Appendix 1 THE PRESSURE-STATE-RESPONSE (PSR) MODEL*
Indicators of environmental performance provide a test for the achievement of environmental sustainability and by extension fulfill the tests required of strong sustainability. However, because they ignore social-economic considerations, such indicators can only offer a necessary rather than a sufficient test of the ecological modernization interpretation of sustainable development. For this reason attempts to develop indicators of sustainable development based on a model of environmental impacts, represent a continued source of confusion.
Nevertheless, environmental indicators offer a starting point for many of the attempts to develop suitable indicators for the broader concepts of sustainable development, and a brief review of such developments provides a helpful introduction to the general methodological issues involved.
One of the best known methodological frameworks using environmental indicators has been developed by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) known as the ‘Pressure-State- Response1 (PSR) which is illustrated in Figure 1.
The selection of indicators able to monitor each of these elements is based on a listing of desirable characteristics for environmental indicators, reproduced as Table 1, which may be compared with the seven criteria for selecting ‘good indicators' as suggested by Anderson and shown in Table 2. The key aspect of these criteria is the matter of analytical soundness. It is not clear that the use of the "pressure-state-response" model is applicable to the ecological modernization interpretation of sustainable development. As Figure 1 suggests, the model underpinning the- OECD approach is purely driven by environmental considerations. Socio-economic elements only enter as sources of pressure on, or regulatory and other responses to, environmental states.
The model suggests that underlying pressures, such as population change, economic growth and policy decisions, produce changes in sectors of activity which create proximate pressures on the capacity of the environment to meet demands on it, identifiable in terms of changes in land use or waste emissions. Proximate pressures then produce impacts on the current state of the environment, which are measured in terms of changes in habitat, noise, ambient levels of pollution, and concentrations of waste in the environment. In turn, such impacts will generate a variety of responses, which normally result in some modification of underlying or proximate pressures at national, sectoral, community or individual levels. The ‘pressure-state-response’ model has been extended to encompass socio-economic factors, as for example in the UK Indicators of Sustainable Development. The capacity of such a model to deal with the broader aims of sustainable development is assessed in the next part of our report.
Figure 1: A basic model of environmental indicators by OECD
•P-S-R*
Indicators
Economic activity Policy
Population change
Socialand economic
Underlying pressure Sectoral
change
Proximate pressure Waste
emissions Landuse
change Environment
andl&nduse
Pollution (concentration)
Noise Impact
Habitat change
R-RfefpenM
Regulation andother response
Response Regulation
response Public
response
49
CoreGroupMeeting theIdentificationofIndicatorsforthe
SustainableDevelopmentandManagementofCaptureFisheriesintheASEANRegion
Table 1: OECD criteria for the selection of environmental indicators* (OECD 1994, p.10) on
Criterion Explanation
Policy relevance and utility for users
An environmental indicator should:
-provide a representative picture of environmental conditions, pressures on the environment or society's responses;
be simple, easy to interpret and able to show trends over time;
be responsive to changes in the environment and related human activities;
provide a basis for international comparisons;
be either national in scope or applicable to regional environmental issues of national significance;
have a threshold or reference value against which to compare it, so that users are able to assess the significance of the values associated with it.
An environmental indicator should:
Analytical soundness
be theoretically well founded in technical and scientific terms;
be based on international standards and international co nsensus about its validity;
lend it to being linked to economic models, forecasting and information systems.
The data required to support the indicator should be:
Measurability
readily available or made available at a reasonable cost/benefit ratio;
adequately documented and of known quality;
updated at regular intervals in accordance with reliable procedures.
* these criteria describe the ‘ideal1 indicator and not all of them will be met in practice
0:
CoreGroupMeetingontheIdentificationofIndicatorsfortheSustainableDevelopmentandManagementofCaptureFisheriesintheASEANRegion
Table 2: Seven criteria for selecting ‘good indicators’ (Anderson 1991, pp.49-51)
Criterion Explanation
Ease of availability The indicator itself, or the information from which it is calculated, should already be available, or can be made available easily and cheaply
Ease of understanding
2. The indicator should be relatively easy to understand
3. Measurability To be relevant, the indicator must relate to a measurable entity rather than a concept
Significance
4. The indicator should measure something believed to be important, or should reflect or represent something of significance
Speed of availability
5. There should be little delay between the element being measured and the availability of the data on this
6. Pattern of incidence The indicator should be able to utilize spatial and social information so that a picture of relative incidence rather than simply aggregate impacts is available
7. Comparability Ideally, international comparisons should be possible through the use of appropriate indicators, but those chosen should not be selected purely to simplify international comparisons at the ex
pense of other objectives
The implementation of the model in the pilot project in Brunei Darussalam is shown in Figure 2 and 3.
FI詹_r«3:Applicationofth*PRESSURE-STATE-RE篡PONE FIUMEWOIIKIn驅ran鲁ID癱
Fl9ur_2iCone籲p奮u纖IPKE篡SURE-STATE-RESPONSE FRAMEWORKIn D麟niM繼Uim
DRIVINGFORCE
(^PRESSURE^) ■ (^RESPONSE^)
\ /
(^^STATE^^) 一 EASING/
EASING
■onai Technical Guideline on the Use of Indicators for Sustainable Develop- re Fisheries in the ASEAN Regionnprepared by Ranimah HjAbd Wahab
’Note: Adapted from “Draft Regh ment and Management of Capture
(the Core Group member from Brunei Darussalam) 51
CoreGroupMeeting theIdentificationofIndicatorsforthe
SustainableDevelopmentandManagementofCaptureFisheriesintheASEANRegion on
Appendix 2
HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM METHOD - used by Malaysia and Indonesia The Concept of Hierarchical System Method
These system have proposed by Chesson and Clayton and involving two familiar variables involv
ing the environmental and human components. It is used to assist in determining how well the management requirements for sustainability are met, and how performance progresses over time.
The effects of fishing are subdivided into the effects on humans and the effects on the environment (sensu lato, including the effects on the resource). The subdivision recognizes that while all effects ultimately influence the quality of human life, some act directly whereas others act indirectly through the environment.
The authors stress that the value of some elements of the structure could be negative. For instance, incomes could be negative when the fishery is in deficit (particularly when taking subsidies and management and other costs into consideration). Similarly, lifestyles could be negative when the situation imposes dangerous or otherwise undesirable conditions on individuals.
The elements within the fiamework can be subdivided further. For instance, the effects on non- target species could be subdivided into indirect and direct effects, and latter could be further subdi
vided into the effects of (i) normal fishing operations and (ii) other fishing operations, such as ghost
fishing.
TVhile the two main elements of Fig. 1 (effects on human and the environment) are often likely to
? adopted as the two major ones for any fishery or fishery subsector, the lower levels may be ianged or subdivided according to local conditions. For each cell of the framework, an objective
、and reference point) must be specified (e.g a figure for total expected revenue) and the related
indicators can be easily determined (e.g actual revenues). In addition, different weights can be given
to different class depending on the policy and the prioritization or objectives. These weights will be
used in combining the values of the indicators from the lower level of the hierarchical tree.
Effects of fishing
Effectsonhumans
Effects on the Environment
Food Primaiy commercial
soecies Employment ‘Non-target species’
Income Other aspects
Lifestyle
Figure 1. A conceptual of Hierarchical system framework
Figure 2: Application of Hierarchical system framework in the Malaysian pilot project
TRAWLFISHERIES
EffectofFishing
No. of Fleet
EffectonEnvironment EffectonHumans
Obedience Vessel
—Habitats
—LifeStyle
_ PopulationStructure
—Employment
WaterQuality L- Income
53