1. APPLICATION OF QUANTITATIVE INDICATORS FOR URBAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE KITAKYUSHU INITIATIVE FOR A CLEAN ENVIRONMENT
Masakazu ICHIMURA
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
Second Meeting of the Kitakyushu Initiative Network
15-17 October 2003, Weihai, China
2019/2/16

2. This Presentation
Outlines document ESD/MG/KIN2/4 which reviews the major findings and feedback from the KICE implementation activities
Scope of the Review
Provisions of KI
Study on Existing/Proposed Indicators
Feedback from Pilot Activities
Feedback from Thematic Seminars
SEM Indicators to fill the Gap
Issues for Consideration
2019/2/16

3. Provisions of KI
The Kitakyushu Initiative, as adopted by MCED2000, recommends the introduction of setting targets and indicators in urban Environmental management, with benefits
Measure the effectiveness and degree of success of policies, and encourage undertaking regular surveys and adjustments.
Sharing of ideas, creating awareness and promoting participation of stakeholders
Assessing the results and feasibility in transfer of successful practices
2019/2/16

4. Provisions of KI (2) Previous KICE Meetings
EGM in Bangkok, August 2001
First Network Meeting, November 2001
Major recommendations
Reaffirmed the usefulness of quantitative indicators and targets as management tools
Application of specific indicators should be considered depending on the specific situation as well as the specific concerns of different municipalities.
The selection of indicators and targets might be performed through a participatory approach,
2019/2/16

5. Study on Existing/Proposed Indicators 1
Just a few examples…
Urban Development Indicators (UN/HABITAT)
Sustainable Development Indicators (UN/CSD)
UNDP Human Development Index
OECD Indicator Core Set
WWF Living Earth Index
IUCN Well-being Assessment
EU Regional Sustainability Indicators       
And many more…!!
2019/2/16

6. Study on Existing/Proposed Indicators 2
Most existing indicators assess the environment and environmental policy performance of entire cities and countries.
Problems in meeting the specific situation and specific concerns as well as the data availability > not readily useable without adjustment
A “indicator design framework” could be learned: first to design (or select) realistic indicators in each individual category, to conduct assessments of sectoral policy performance and to integrate.
2019/2/16

7. Study on Existing/Proposed Indicators 3
Key features of Kitakyushu Initiative indicators
The Kitakyushu Initiative indicators would assess the status of the urban environment, the progress of urban environmental policy and the effect of that policy.
The Kitakyushu Initiative indicators should support decision-making in choosing the best method for the design and implementation of policies in line with successful examples of policies in other regions
The indicators should also be useful in judging the applicability of successful practices in a specific region, in other sites and different situations.
2019/2/16

8. Pilot Activities 1
All pilot activities are implemented with the purpose of verifying achievement of various targets and results obtained in urban environmental management.
Monitoring of the progress of measures using quantitative indicators has become an essential element of this exercise.
The indicators used are essentially those chosen by the implementing bodies in accordance with the context of each project.
2019/2/16

9. Pilot Activities 2 Main examples listed in Table 1.
Selected Cases in more detail
Ningbo
Application of systematic indicators, in line with national policy (UEQES & CEMC) framework
developed into shared targets (see Table 2),
thereby procuring an efficient inter-sector partnership and participation.
Nonthaburi
Puerto Princessa
2019/2/16

10. Pilot Activities 3 Selected Cases in more detail Nonthaburi
Indicators (quantity of waste collected and recycling rate) to share ideas of local initiative and raise awareness
Puerto Princessa
ICLEI’s Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) Scheme
Local Air Pollution Management Linked with broader issues in global context (climate change)
Possibilities of additional funding sources
2019/2/16

11. Pilot Activities 4 Many Lessons..!!
Locally selected indicators and target to form the common basis among project participants
Useful indicators are readily visible, easily understandable
Effectiveness of indicators for small groups to gain ownership in implementation
Link with global issues may be the clue for the universally applicable indicators
2019/2/16

12. Thematic Seminars The paper outlines the selected outcomes of
1) Solid Waste Management (Kitakyushu, September 2002);
2) Public-Private Partnerships in Urban Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment (Beijing, 4 November 2002); and
3) Urban Air Quality Management (Bangkok, February 2003).
2019/2/16

13. Thematic Seminars 2 Solid Waste Management
General economic indicators may be used for categorizing the cities according to their development stage and identifying counterparts or matchmaking for inter-city cooperation.
Fundamental indicators (waste volume, etc.) are indispensable in policy management as well as day-to-day operation - target values may be set using comparisons to other cities at a similar developmental stage and can be used as a stimulus for the promotion of measures involving public participation.
Data accuracy at the practical level
2019/2/16

14. Thematic Seminars 3
Public-Private Partnerships in Urban Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment
measuring policy attainment in PPP using indicators or quantitative means is not yet mature.
Apparent gap for future consideration
A needs for indicators to contribute to the monitoring of the maturity of the partnership-forming environment for both the public and the private sector with regard to PPP
2019/2/16

15. Thematic Seminars 4 Urban Air Quality Management
Use of indicators in urban air pollution management strongly backed by international experts.
As measurement of pollutant levels usually requires a sophisticate monitoring system, alternative indicators, rather simple, are also sufficiently useful as policy tool.
Participants recommended development of a common framework for air pollution management based on the use of major indicators as an activity of the Kitakyushu Initiative Network.
2019/2/16

16. Thematic Seminars 5 ESCAP Portfolio Study
Even famous “Best practices” are not necessarily supported by quantitative information, their potential to transfer experiences are not easily assessed.
Although indicators provide a firm and useful basis for self assessment, external assessment may be appreciated from donor point of view.
Usefulness of ‘simplified’ indicators confirmed
2019/2/16

17. Opportunities and Gaps
Application more and more broadened in urban environmental management
Past application of quantitative indicators focused mainly on the environmental quality performance, such as air and water quality, and management and treatment of wastes.
Gap identified : need for indicators to assess progress of institutional capacity building in municipal administrations as well as interaction and development of collaborative partnership among stakeholders (such as PPP).
2019/2/16

18. Indicators for Social Environmental Management Capacity (SEMS)
An emerging tool to possibly fill the current gap.
SEMS
takes the three parties of government, private enterprise, and the public as chief social actors in environmental management, and
sets a benchmark for each actor’s system improvement and on the mutual interaction among the actors in relation to environmental management,
thereby analyzing the development stage of social environmental management capacity.
Provide self assessment framework to evaluate the environmental management capacity of the urban community as a whole
2019/2/16

19. Social Environmental Management Capacity (SEMS) - Diagram
2019/2/16

20. Issues for Consideration
(a) Further promotion of the application of quantitative indicators through KICE implementation.
(b) Capacity building in environmental quality monitoring at local level / further study and promotion of simplified practical indicators and monitoring through participatory approaches encouraged.
(c) A new framework to assess social capacity to manage urban environment needed. Municipalities may wish to volunteer to participate in testing of the new framework.
2019/2/16

21. Thank You
IGES Kitakyushu Office Kitakyushu International Conference Center, 6F , Asano, Kokurakita-ku, Kitakyushu Japan Phone : Facsimile : URL :
2019/2/16