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

2. Why measure? To provide feedback on system behaviour and policy performance To improve chances of successful adaptation To ensure movement toward common goals To improve implementation To increase accountability

3. Indicators and SD Since 1990s, SD creates opportunity and challenges for ‘constructive ambiguity’ Recognizing the links between environmental conditions and human activities Highlighting the need for long-term perspectives Considering equity both within and between generations Engaging the participation of all sectors of society in the decision-making process

4. Steps in the integrated reporting processes

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

7. Indicators should… Be developed within an accepted conceptual framework Be clearly defined and easy to understand Be subject to aggregation Be objective Have reasonable data requirements Be relevant to users Be limited in number Reflect causes, process or results (World Bank, 1997)

8. Examples of indicator system development

10. 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; and Provide a quality-control mechanism.

11. Lessons from GEO for national and regional assessment Assessment and reporting concepts and strategies Stakeholders’ involvement in assessment and reporting Report structure Organization of reporting process Communication of results

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

15. 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 response and adaptation mechanisms Information Influence

16. 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 integration Scoping 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

17. 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

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

19. Step in the system development

20. Well-being of the community

21. Domains of Well-being and Issues Impacting Well-being

22. 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

23. Challenges Data 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