GENERAL DISTRIBUTION OCDE/GD(93)179 ENVIRONMENT …

GENERAL DISTRIBUTION

OCDE/GD(93)179

ENVIRONMENT MONOGRAPHS

N° 83

OECD CORE SET OF INDICATORS FORENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS

A synthesis report by the Groupon the State of the Environment

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT

Paris 1993

COMPLETE DOCUMENT AVAILABLE ON OLIS IN ITS ORIGINAL FORMAT

GENERAL DISTRIBUTION

ENVIRONMENT MONOGRAPHS

This series is designed to make available to a wide readership selected technicalreports prepared by the Environment Policy Committee and Directorate. This reporton "OECD Core Set of Indicators for Environmental Performance Reviews" isderestricted under the authority of the Secretary-General. Additional copies ofEnvironment Monographs on a limited basis can be forwarded on request.

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT

Copyright OECD 1993

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1. Terminology and framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.1 Definition and functions of environmental indicators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.2 Indicators in the Pressure-State-Response framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.3 Structuring elements: environmental issues and economic sectors. . . . . . . . . . 11

2. The use of indicators in environmental performance reviews. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

3. Indicator development by environmental issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Issue 1: Climate change. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Issue 2: Stratospheric ozone depletion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Issue 3: Eutrophication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Issue 4: Acidification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Issue 5: Toxic contamination. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Issue 6: Urban environmental quality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Issues 7&8:Biological diversity and landscape. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Issue 9: Waste. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Issue 10: Water resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Issue 11: Forest resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Issue 12: Fish resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Issue 13: Soil degradation (erosion and desertification). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

General indicators, not attributable to specific issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

3

OECD Core Set of Indicators Introduction

INTRODUCTION

Demand for the development of environmental indicators by OECD has been expressed along twocomplementary lines. First, the OECD Council in 1989 called for further work to integrate environmentand economic decision-making. This was reiterated in consecutive G-7 summits and led to the approvalof an OECD Council Recommendation on Environmental Indicators and Information by OECDGovernments in 1991. Second, the OECD has been entrusted by its Member countries to launch a newprogramme of environmental performance reviews with the principal aim of helping Member countries toimprove their individual and collective performance in environmental management. Reviews are conductedunder the auspices of the Group on Environmental Performance and evaluate individual countries’environmental performance in respect of environmental quality, national objectives and internationalcommitments. One year after the UNCED conference in Rio de Janeiro, with several new conventionsadopted, this international dimension is of particular relevance.

These demands are reflected in the OECD work programme on environmental indicators,comprising indicator development for the integration of environmental concern into sectoral policies,environmental and natural resource accounting and the development of indicators for use in environmentalperformance reviews (see also section "uses of indicators" below).

During the meeting of the Group on Environmental Performance on 15-16 April 1992, theDelegations of the Netherlands, Norway and the United States proposed to hold several workshopsconcerning environmental indicators to support work on environmental performance evaluation. The Groupon Environmental Performance and the Group on the State of the Environment welcomed these suggestions.

The main objectives established for this work were:

-- to contribute to the harmonizationof the many individual initiatives of OECD Membercountries in the field of environmental indicators;

-- to prepare, in an OECD context, guidance for the useof environmental indicators inconnection with the evaluation of environmental performance;

-- to stimulate, within the OECD programme on environmental indicators, the development ofa core set of selected and/or aggregated indicators(so-called Indicators), thereby givingpriority to the development of a limited set for international use.

The present document is organised accordingly:

-- Harmonization: Chapter 1 presents the common framework and terminology adopted by theOECD Group on the State of the Environment; the development of a common set ofenvironmental issues and indicator proposals also contributes to the harmonization ofindividual countries’ initiatives;

-- Guidance: Chapter 2 proposes general guidelines for the use of indicators in the context ofenvironmental performance reviews and presents examples from reviews already carried out;

-- Core set of indicators: Chapter 3 summarises the discussion on the development of a core setof indicators, each indicator ranked with respect to data availability and measurability.

4

OECD Core Set of Indicators Framework

Chapter 1

TERMINOLOGY AND FRAMEWORK

1.1 Definition and functions of environmental indicators

In a very general way, an indicator can be defined as a parameter or a value derived fromparameters, which provides information about a phenomenon (see Table 1). The indicator has significancethat extends beyond the properties directly associated with the parameter value. Indicators possess asynthetic meaning and are developed for a specific purpose. This points to two major functions ofindicators:

-- they reduce the number of measurements and parameters which normally would be requiredto give an "exact" presentation of a situation. As a consequence, the size of a set of indicatorsand the amount of detail contained in the set need to be limited. A set with a large numberof indicators will tend to clutter the overview it is meant to provide. Too few or even a singleindicator, on the other hand, may be insufficient to provide all the necessary relevantinformation. In addition, methodological problems related to weighting tend to becomegreater with an increasing level of aggregation;

-- they simplify the communication process by which the information of results of measurementis provided to the user. Due to this simplification and adaptation to user needs, indicatorsmay not always meet strict scientific demands to demonstrate causal chains. Indicators shouldtherefore be regarded as an expression of "the best knowledge available".

As indicators are used for varying purposes it is necessary to define general criteria for theselection of indicators. Three basic criteria have been used in OECD work: policy relevance, analyticalsoundness and measurability. Table 2 offers a more detailed presentation of these general criteria.

1.2 Indicators in the Pressure-State-Response framework

The Pressure-State-Response framework

There are several frameworks around which indicators can be developed and organised. Thereis no unique framework that generates sets of indicators for every purpose. Also, a framework may changeover time as scientific understanding of environmental problems increases, and as societal values evolve.In the context of the work of the Group on the State of the Environment, the Pressure-State-Response (PSR)framework has been used. The PSR framework (Figure 1a) is based on a concept of causality: humanactivities exert pressureson the environment and change its quality and the quantity of natural resources(the "state" box). Society responds to these changes through environmental, general economic and sectoralpolicies (the "societal response"). The latter form a feedback loop to pressures through human activities.In a wider sense, these steps form part of an environmental (policy) cycle which includes problemperception, policy formulation, monitoring and policy evaluation.

While the PSR framework has the advantage of highlighting these links, it tends to suggest linearrelationships in the human activity-environment interaction. This should not obstruct the view of morecomplex relationships in ecosystems and in environment-economy interactions.

5


Indicators

Table 1. Definition of Terms

INDICATOR A parameter, or a value derived from parameters, which points to/provides informationabout/describes the state of a phenomenon/environment/area with a significance extending beyondthat directly associated with a parameter value.

INDEX A set of aggregated or weighted parameters or indicators.

PARAMETER A property that is measured or observed.

INDICATORS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS

Correspond to "state" box of the Pressure-State-Response framework. They compriseenvironmental quality and aspects of quantity and quality of natural resources.

INDICATORS OF ENVIRONMENTAL PRESSURES

Correspond to "pressure" box of PSR framework. They describe pressures on the environmentcaused by human activities. They compriseindicators of proximate pressure(stress indicators)and indicators of indirect pressure(background indicators).

RESPONSE INDICATORS

Correspond to "Response" box in PSR framework. In the present context, the word "response"is used only forsocietal(not ecosystem)response.

INDICATORS FOR USE IN PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Selected and/or aggregated indicators of environmental conditions, indicators of environmentalpressures and indicators of societal responses for the purpose of environmental performanceevaluation.

ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS

Comprise all indicators in the Pressure-State-Response framework, i.e. indicators of environmentalpressures, conditions and responses.

Within the PSR framework, three broad types of indicators can be distinguished:

a) Indicators of environmental pressurescorrespond to the "pressure" box of the PSR framework.They describe pressures from human activities exerted on the environment, including thequality and quantity of natural resources. A distinction can be drawn between indicators ofproximate pressures(pressures directly exerted on the environment, normally expressed interms of emissions or consumption of natural resources) and indicators of indirect pressures(background indicators reflecting human activities which lead to proximate environmentalpressures).

b) Indicators of environmental conditionscorrespond to the "state" box of the PSR frameworkand relate to the quality of the environment and the quality and quantity of natural resources.As such they reflect the ultimate objective of environmental policy making. Indicators of

6


environmental conditions should be designed to give an overview of the situation (the state)of the environment and its development over time, and not the pressures on it. In practice,the distinction between environmental conditions and the pressures may be ambiguous and themeasurement of environmental conditions can turn out to be difficult or very costly.Therefore, the measurement of environmental pressures is often used as a substitute for themeasurement of environmental conditions.

Table 2. Criteria for Indicator Selection *

Policy relevance and utility for users

An environmental indicator should:

• provide a representative picture of environmental conditions, pressures on the environment orsociety’s responses;

• be simple,easy to interpret and able to showtrends over time;• be responsive to changesin the environment and related human activities;• provide a basis forinternational comparisons;• be eithernational in scopeor applicable to regional environmental issues of national significance;• have athreshold or reference valueagainst which to compare it so that users are able to assess

the significance of the values associated with it.

Analytical soundness

An environmental indicator should:

• be theoreticallywell founded in technical and scientific terms;• be based on international standards andinternational consensusabout its validity;• lend itself to being linked to economic models, forecasting and information systems.

Measurability

The data required to support the indicator should be:

• readily available or made availableat a reasonable cost/benefitratio;• adequatelydocumentedand ofknown quality ;• updated at regular intervals in accordance with reliable procedures.

*These criteria describe the "ideal" indicator and not all of them will be met in practice.

c) Indicators of societal responsescorrespond to the "response" box in the PSR framework.Societal response indicators are measurements which show to what degree society isresponding to environmental changes and concerns. Societal responses refer to individual andcollective actions to mitigate, adapt to or prevent human-induced negative impacts on theenvironment and to halt or reverse environmental damage already inflicted. Societal responses

7


also include actions for the preservation and the conservation of the environment and naturalresources.

Compared to indicators of environmental pressures and many indicators of environmentalconditions, most indicators of societal responses have a shorter history and are still in a phaseof development, both conceptually and in terms of data availability. This must be taken intoaccount in their use to avoid misinterpretation. Two more specific points arise with societalresponse indicators.

First, the distinction between indicators of environmental pressures and indicators of societalresponses may become blurred when response indicators capture the feedback effect ofsociety’s responses on environmental pressures. A reduction in greenhouse gas emissions orimprovements in energy efficiency could, for example, be interpreted both as a pressure andas a response indicator for climate change. Ideally, the response indicator should reflectsociety’s effortsin tackling a particular environmental problem.

Second, as indicators are of a quantitative nature, societal response indicators are limited toresponses which are measurable in quantitative terms. Responses which can only beexpressed in qualitative terms (e.g. whether an international environmental agreement has beenratified or not) are therefore absent in the present set of indicators. In a number of cases,responses may be measurable in principle but are too specific or too numerous to be measuredin practice. A case in point is the area of technology-related regulations and standards withcomprehensive, detailed rules which are difficult to express in a concise way or to compareinternationally. In performance reviews, qualitative and scientific information typicallysupplements the quantitative indicators.

Use of indicators

Different users of environmental indicators have different needs. Thus, the appropriate set ofindicators depends on their particular use. In the work of the Group on the State of the Environment fourmajor categories of use are present:

-- measurement of environmental performance;

-- integration of environmental concerns in sector policies1;

-- integration of environmental and economic decision-making more generally (e.g. throughenvironmental accounting2);

-- reporting on the state of the environment.

1 Indicators for integration of environmental concerns in sectoral policies are, in the OECD context, specializedsub-sets covering the whole range of indicators for use by sectoral decision-makers.

2 Although indicators of environmental pressures, conditions and societal responses provide input for work onenvironmental accounting, frameworks different from the PSR model underlie the work on environmental accounting.

8


Conceptually, indicators forthese specific purposes (performance evaluation, reporting on the stateof the environment) should be distinguished from specific types ofindicators, i.e. indicators ofenvironmental conditions, pressures, societal responses (see Figure 1b). There is no one-to-onecorrespondence between indicators distinguished by their nature and indicators distinguished by their use:for each type of use, background, stress, environmental quality, natural resource, and response indicatorsare of potential relevance. For example, indicators for state of the environment reporting could well bedrawn from all types of indicators -- pressure indicators, indicators of environmental conditions andresponse indicators.

Similarly, a set of indicators would be selected from all types to meet the specific needs of policyperformance evaluation. Indicators for performance evaluation would encompass indicators ofenvironmental pressures, conditions and societal responses. What characterizes such indicators would bethat these indicators are used to evaluate performance, mainly by putting them into the context of national3

and international goals, objectives and targets.

3 This may include sub-national issues of national significance.

9


Figure 1aPressure - State - Response Framework

Information

Societal Responses (Decisions - Actions)

PRESSURES STATE RESPONSES

Information

Economic and

Environmental Agents

Administrations

Households

Enterprises

International

Air

Water

Land

Natural Resources

State of the Environment

and of Natural ResourcesHuman Activities

Energy

Transport

Industry

Agriculture

Others

--> national level

INDICATORS OF

--> sectoral level

--> international levelINDICATORS OFENVIRONMENTAL

Environmental quality,quality and quantity of

natural resources

CONDITIONS

Pressures from aggregateand sectoral activities

INDICATORS OFENVIRONMENTAL

PRESSURES

the integration ofenvironmental concerns

sectoral policiesinto

the evaluation ofenvironmentalperformance

the integration ofenvironmental concerns into

economic policiesmore generally

the reporting onthe state of

the environment

Pressures

ResourcesSocietal Responses(Decisions - Actions)

Figure 1b

Nature and Use of Environmental Indicators

SOCIETAL RESPONSES

ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS OF:

USED FOR:

10


1.3 Structuring elements: environmental issues and economic sectors

Environmental issues

The Pressure-State-Response framework structures and classifies types of indicators. The broadcategories following from the PSR framework (indicators of environmental pressures, environmentalconditions and societal responses), give, however, insufficient guidance for the choice of the specificenvironmental areas for which indicators need to be developed. In its February workshop, the Group onthe State of the Environment identified a list of issues which reflect current environmental challenges.These issues represent the first structuring element. By necessity, they depend on changing and sometimesconflicting perceptions. The list of issues is not necessarily final nor exhaustive. In fact, the list is flexibleand new issues can be incorporated or old ones abandoned according to their environmental relevance. Thepurpose of the list is to serve as a focus for indicator development: Figure 2 shows how indicators ofenvironmental conditions, pressures and responses can be associated with individual issues.

Broadly spoken, issues 1 to 9 can be considered "sink-oriented", dealing with issues ofenvironmental quality, whereas issues 10 to 13 are "source-oriented", focusing on the quantity aspect ofnatural resources. Not all indicators can be directly associated with a specific environmental issue (e.g.,population growth, economy-wide environmental expenditure or public opinion on the environment). Acategory of general and/or not attributable indicators has therefore been introduced in the framework inFigure 2.

Sectors in the Pressure-State-Response framework

In principle, pressure and societal response indicators can be considered at a sectoral level. Dataavailability permitting, such a disaggregation is one tool in analysing the environmental pressures exertedby sectors such as agriculture, industry, energy or transport. Similarly, for societal responses, governmentresponses could be distinguished from those of the business sector (including agriculture, energy, industryetc.) or private households (see Figure 3). Indicators at the sectoral level are therefore a useful tool in thecontext of environmental performance reviews for reviewing the integration of environmental and sectoralpolicies.

There exists a direct link to the work of the Group on the State of the Environment on indicatorsfor the integration of environmental concerns into sectoral policies. So far, work has been undertaken inthe areas of energy, transport, forestry and agriculture4. Selected indicators from these activities canprovide a direct input to the core set of indicators for use in environmental performance reviews.

Sector disaggregation can be carried out in

-- a functionalsense (relating to sources of pollution): sectors relate to specific, environmentallyrelevant activities. The transport sector, for example, would comprise all transport activities,irrespective of whether they are carried out by manufacturing industry, private households orspecialised transportation firms;

4 See "Indicators for the integration of environmental concerns into energy policies" [ENV/EPOC/SE(92)4/REV1]; "Indicatorsfor the integration of environmental concerns into transport policies" [ENV/EPOC/SE(91)17/REV1]; "Indicators for the integrationof environmental concerns into agricultural policies" [ENV/EPOC/SE(93)2]; "Indicators for the integration of environmentalconcerns into forestry policies" [ENV/EC/SE(91)16].

11


Figure 2 Structure of Indicators by Environmental Issue

PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE

Issues

Indicators ofenvironmental

pressures


conditions

Indicators ofsocietal

responses

1. Climate change

2. Ozone layer depletion

3. Eutrophication

4. Acidification

5. Toxic contamination

6. Urban environmentalquality

7. Biological diversity

8. Landscape

9. Waste

10. Water resources

11. Forest resources

12. Fish resources

13. Soil degradation(desertification anderosion)

14. General indicators, notattributable to specificissues

12


Agric

ultu

re

1. Climate change

2. Ozone layer depletion

13. Soil degradation

Pressure State Response

Issues


pressures


conditions


responses

Hou

seho

lds

Indu

stry

. . .

Agric

ultu

re

Hou

seho

lds

Indu

stry

. . .

Gov

ernm

ent

Environment-EconomyIntegration

Figure 3: Sectors in the Pressure-State-Response Framework

-- an institutionalsense (relating to economic activity): sectors relate to the primary activities ofeconomic establishments or firms. In this sense, the transport sector would be restricted to thatpart of the service sector dealing with transport services as a primary activity. Transport activitiescarried out in conjunction with manufacturing would be recorded in the sector "manufacturingindustry". Industry classifications such as ISIC (International Standard Industry Classification)are based on this principle.

The following lists show sectors organised along the two approaches:

13


Institutional approach (economic sectors):

AgricultureForestryFisheryMining and quarryingManufacturingElectricity generation

Transport services

Other services

Private households

Functional approach (sources ofpollution):

AgricultureForestryFisheryMining and quarryingManufacturingEnergy (extraction, production,distribution, use)TransportTourismOther services

Private households

It should be noted that private households are included as a sector. This category differs fromthe other sectors as it does not have a significant impact as a sector of production, but underlines the roleof households as consumers. According to the specific question under consideration, sectoral sub-divisionscan be developed either in a functional or an institutional sense. If double-counting is to be avoided,however, consistency of use (functional or institutional) needs to be assured. Also, with a view tocombining data on sectoral pressures and economic activity, environmental data and economic data needto be collected and applied in a consistent manner.

Issue-profiles

In principle, it is possible to establish a systematic link between environmental pressures anddifferent sectors in the form of issue-profiles5. An issue-profile consists of the contributions of relevantsectors to a particular environmental pressure (e.g. greenhouse gas emissions) which in turn can be linkedto an issue (e.g. climate change). Figure 4 presents a stylised issue-profile. Issue-profiles could help toidentify the economic activity causing a particular environmental problem and, combined with informationon sectoral responses, provide useful information for performance reviews. At present, however, problemsof data availability and measurement severely constrain any systematic development of issue profiles at theinternational level.

Future developments

As a medium-term perspective, further integration of economic and environmental informationshould be possible with a view to fostering sustainable development strategies. Pressure indicators could,for example, be related to parameters reflecting economic activity thus providing an analytical tool for theintegration of economy and environment in decision making.

5Conceptually, issue profiles are distinct from the approach taken in other OECD work on indicators for the integration ofenvironmental concern into sectoral policies. The latter are broad sets of indicators covering the whole interface between sectoralpolicies (energy, transport, agriculture etc.) and environment. Issue profiles would be more constrained in the sense that they onlydeal with one particular environmental issue and that they focus on environmental pressures. On the other hand, they permit thesystematicallocation of environmental pressures across sectors -- a feature not present in other work on sectoral indicators. Also,issue profiles can be organised along economic sectors, i.e., in an institutional sense whereas the work on indicators for theintegration of environmental concerns into sectoral policies follows a functional approach.

14


Sector contributionto environmental pressurein percent

Agriculture

Mining and quarrying

Energy

Manufacturing

Households

Figure 4 Issue-profile by sector

15

OECD Core Set of Indicators Use in Environmental Performance Reviews

Chapter 2

THE USE OF INDICATORS IN ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS

Efforts of the OECD programme of environmental performance reviews are directed at promotingsustainable development, with the principal aim of improving the individual and collective performancesin environmental management. Environmental performance reviews are structured to further the followingprincipal goals6:

· reducing the overall pollution burden and managing natural resources in a sustainable way;· integrating environmental and economic or sectoral policies;· strengthening international co-operation.

Environmental performance is to be assessed by comparing achievements or progress with:

· national objectives;· international commitments;· absolute levels of environmental quality, taking account of each country’s physical, human

and economic context.

Seven principles apply for the use of environmental indicators in performance reviews. Thischapter briefly discusses these principles and presents examples of the use of indicators in environmentalperformance reviews.

Indicators have the advantage of being concise and having a meaning that goes beyond the simple

1. Indicators provideone of the toolsin the process of performance evaluation and need to besupplemented by other qualitative and scientific information.

parameter value. However, there is a danger of misinterpretation if indicators are presented withoutappropriate supplementary information. Such information is particularly needed to explain driving forcesbehind indicator changes which in turn form the basis for any assessment of environmental performance.Box 1 presents an example from the review of Iceland where indicators of air emissions are embedded insupplementary information about the source of emissions.

When comparing emissions across countries, the outcome of the assessment will depend greatly

2. There is no uniquenormalisation for the comparison of environmental variables acrosscountries: where possible, normalisation by unit of GDP should be shown in parallel witha normalisation by the number of inhabitants. Other possibilities such as total surface existfor normalisation and may be appropriate for specific environmental pressures.

on whether GDP or population size are chosen as denominator. Although standardisation is needed tofacilitate cross-country comparisons, absolute values may be the appropriate measure where, for example,international commitments are linked to absolute levels of emissions.

6 As set forth by the OECD Environment Ministers in their 1991 communiqué on the "OECD Environmental Strategy for the1990s".

16


Boxes 1 and 2 are examples of this principle put into practice: core indicators on air pollution

3. The set of indicators developed in the series of workshops of the Group on the State of theEnvironment is acore set. In the context of performance reviews, this core set is commonto all or most Member countries, and will generally be supplemented by more detailed,country-specific indicators.

(Box 1) provide a cross-country comparison but are confined to a particular point in time. In addition, airpollution in Iceland is shown for a larger number of pollutants and for several years. Similarly, in thereview of Germany (Box 2) types and evolution of waste water treatment in Germany are shown in detailto supplement the cross-country comparison provided by the core indicator on the percentage of thepopulation connected to waste water treatment plants with biological and/or chemical treatment.

In performance reviews, this principle is followed in two ways. First, the text directly

4. For performance evaluation, indicators must bereported and interpreted in theappropriate context, taking into account the ecological, geographical, social, economic andstructural features of countries.

accompanying the indicator contains a certain amount of contextual information (see, for example, the firstparagraphs in Box 1 and Box 2). Second, in every performance review, an introductory chapter deals withthe overall physical, demographic, economic and administrative context of the respective country.

5. Not every area of assessment lends itself to the use ofquantitative information . Certainpolicy areas may be assessed in qualitative terms. Thus, the issues covered byenvironmental indicators are a subset of the issues covered by performance reviews.

6. In conceptual and in empirical terms,indicators of societal responsestend to be lessadvanced than indicators of environmental pressures or indicators of environmentalconditions. Thus,particular caution needs to be applied when interpreting and usingindicators of societal responses.

More generally, key information on methodology for indicator derivation should accompanythe use of indicators in performance reviews.

7. There is no necessary one-to-one correspondance between environmental issues and theindicators identified: a specific indicator can be relevant for more than one environmentalissue.

17


CO

0 100 200 300 400

kg C/1000 US$

SOx

0 2 4 6 8 10

NOx

0 2 4 6 8 10

State: emissions per unit of GDP

State: emissions per capita

Iceland

Denmark

Finland

Norway

Sweden

Canada

Nordic countries

OECD Europe

OECD

0 2 4 6 8 10

tonnes C/cap.

SOx

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

kg/capita

kg/1000 US$ kg/1000 US$

a) From energy use only.b) Data for the late 1980s include emissions from waste treatment and c) 1990 or latest available year.d) GDP at 1985 price levels and Purchasing Power Parities.

e) Nordic countries include Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden.f) Data include western Germany only.

172 1.9

225

265

188

175

314

208

2

a

CO2

a

c

c

Iceland

Denmark

Finland

Norway

Sweden

Canada

Nordic countries

OECD Europe

OECD

NOx

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

107.5

48.5

55.8

50.0

43.3

73.0

49.1

30.5

43.6 kg/capita

2.7

190

246

3.5

1.0

1.4

9.4

2.1

2.6

3.3

7.9

3.5

4.2

3.7

3.0

4.5

3.5

2.5

3.0

2.4

3.2

3.7

2.5

2.5

5.2

2.9

2.2

3.5

26.3

37.6

48.8

13.9

19.6

148.2

28.9

31.7

47.6

ddd

OECD, OECD-IEASource:

e

f

f

disposal.

e

f

f

Trends in Iceland

SOx

NOx

Carbon Monoxide

Volatile organic compounds

CO2

1 000 tonnes

1 000 tonnes

1 000 tonnes

1 000 tonnes

million tonnes of C

5.5

15.0

26.0

4.9

0.54

8.6

13.7

29.1

5.4

0.53

6.6

20.8

32.8

5.9

0.53

6.7

27.4

44.9

9.6

0.60

21.8

82.7

72.7

95.9

11.1

1975 1980 1985 1991 1975-1991% change

Box 1. The Use of Indicators:Example from the Environmental Performance Review of Iceland

Air pollution

Although Iceland’s per capita consumption of energy is high and is higher than that of any other OECD country,its unusually high proportion of hydro and geothermal energy contributes substantially to maintaining pollution at low levels.Total primary energy supply (TPES) per unit of GDP in 1990 was 84 per cent above the OECD average and 69 per centabove the average for the other Nordic countries. TPES per capita was 71 per cent greater than the OECD average and 57per cent higher than the average for other Nordic countries. The Icelandic authorities successfully reduced oil consumptionthrough substitution of renewable resources. Electricity is generated almost exclusively from hydropower, and geothermalenergy contributes a high share of space heating.

Context and supplementaryinformation

Country-specific indicatorsand data

Core indicator

Assessment

The implications of these increases in certain pollution emissions for human health and ecosystems may be minordue to the assimilative capacity of the environment. For example, in spite of the sharp expansion in NOx emissions, the levelof depositions is at least three times lower than in any European country. Thus, the Icelandic authorities have drawn specialattention to the need to consider pollution concentrations and ambient levels in implementing international commitments.

18


Biological Oxygen Demand

Annual mean values

1970 1975 1980 1985

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Bio

logi

cal O

xyge

n D

eman

d (B

OD

5 in

mg/

l)

Population served by waste water treatment plants(biological and/or chemical treatment)

late 1980s

Notes: a) OECD Secretariat estimates. b) England and Wales only.

Germany

w.Germany

e.Germany

Canada

USA

France (a)

Italy (a)

UK (b)

0 20 40 60 80

79,7

9

37,7

53,0

59,0

64,0

49,0

79,0

% of population served

Source: OECD

Development of public waste water treatment

Connected to public sewer system

Treated in public sewage treatement plant Not treatedin public sewage

treatmentplant

Not connectedto public

sewer systemBiologically Mechanically

treatedtreated

western Germany196919751979198319871990

eastern Germany1990

445772828790

201910521

36 22

15107431

15

211411987

27

% of

The Rhine: water quality at downstream border

Box 2. The Use of Indicators:Example from the Environmental Performance Review of Germany

Surface water

The authority to establish water quality objectives in surface or ground water rests with the Länder. The goal ofthe western Länder is to achieve Quality Class II in all rivers, i.e. Moderate Pollution, the third from highest quality inGermany’s seven-tiered water quality ranking system. Class II is defined as: water sections with moderate pollution andgood oxygen supply; a very wide variety of species and dense colonisation by individual algae, snails, entomostracans andinsect larvae; aquatic plants covering large areas; and fertile fishing waters. No date has been set for achieving this overallgoal.

Context and supplementaryinformation

Country-specific indicatorsand data

Core indicator

Assessment

Major improvements in the quality of surface waters have occurred in western Germany, particularly with respectto oxygen-demanding substances and toxic compounds such as heavy metals. These improvements can be explained bothby the progressive equipment of municipalities with sewage treatment plants providing relatively efficient biological andadvanced treatment of waste waters and by impressive progress in the installation of treatment equipment at industrialfacilities. This has led to significant improvements in the waters of the Rhine, Danube, Neckar and Main rivers.

19

OECD Core Set of Indicators Indicator Development

Chapter 3

INDICATOR DEVELOPMENT BY ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE

This chapter summarises the work on indicator development, carried out during the workshopsof the Group on the State of the Environment. In addition, a number of lead countries providedspecific input for the different issues. In this sense, significant parts of the indicators or elements ofindicators described below represent an interim consensus. None of them should, however, beperceived as final or necessarily exhaustive in character: they may change as knowledge andperception of environmental problems evolve, they still require detailed technical descriptions and theymay be of varying relevance for different countries.

In this chapter, first-choice indicators are highlighted and placed in white boxes. Where theseare not readily measurable, one or several proxy indicators are added in grey fields. Grey fields alsocontain supplementary indicators to round up the picture provided by the core indicator or itssubstitutes. All indicators or elements of indicators are classified according to their availability: "S"for indicators measurable in the short-term; "M" for indicators which require additional empirical workand data collection efforts and which are therefore only measurable in the medium term and "L" forindicators measurable only in the long term because they would need significant data developmentwork. All the indicators measurable in the short runare brought together in the overview in Figure 5at the end of this chapter.

The treatment of indicators for each environmental issue comprises the following elements:

a) a table summarising indicators and classifying them by degree of measurability;

b) a short description of the environmental concern and policy relevance of the issue withreference to major international agreements or conventions (e.g. Agenda 21, the MontrealProtocol);

c) a brief discussion of the indicators of environmental pressures, environmental conditionsand societal responses where possible;

d) a note concerning the data availability for each category of indicator.

20


Issue 1: Climate Change

The environmental concern and policy

Summary of Indicators

Indicator Measurability

Environmental pressures:

Index of GHG emissions S/M

Emissions of CO2

Emissions of CH4

Apparent consumption*

ofCFC 11 and 12; halonsEmissions of N2O

SS/M

S/MM

Environmental conditions:

Atmosphericconcentration ofgreenhouse gasesGlobal mean temperature

SS

Societal responses:

Energy efficiency M/L

Energy intensityImplicit and explicit tax onenergy/CO2

Expenditure on energyefficiency, alternativeenergies, climate changeresearch

S

M/L

M

*Apparent consumption = production plus imports minusexports.

relevance : in recent decades, the balance in theradiative energy budget of the earth-atmospheresystem has been disturbed by the addition ofgases generated by human activities. Anincrease of the atmospheric concentration ofthese greenhouse gases changes the radiativeenergy balance and leads to temperature andclimate change.

One of the major international agreements whichemerged from 1992 "Earth Summit" in Rio deJaneiro was the UN Framework Convention onClimate Change. A number of countries havemade commitments to reduce their emissions ofgreenhouse gases over the coming years.

Indicators of environmental pressures : fourdifferent radiately active gases have direct effectson climate change: carbon dioxide, methane,nitrous oxide, halocarbons. The indicators ofenvironmental pressures relate to grossemissions, i.e., they do not consider sinks ofgreenhouse gases. For an aggregate indicator ofgreenhouse gas emissions, all four gases shouldbe taken into account. Aggregation supposes aweighting scheme, based on global warmingpotentials (GWP) as proposed by theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Todate, however, major uncertainties exist about thesize of these weighting factors. Until definitiveweighting factors are put forward, it is proposed toconsider each greenhouse gas individually. In thefuture, it may also be necessary to includeemissions of substitutes for CFCs with high GWP.

Data availability: CO2 emissions are well covered,in particular emissions from energy use (Source:OECD/IEA). For CFCs, apparent consumption ismonitored under the Montreal Protocol. Estimateson methane emissions exist but country coverageis smaller and there are wide divergencesbetween estimates from different sources (Source:OECD). Information on halons is very limited.Significant measurement problems exist with N2O.

Indicators of environmental conditions : theatmospheric concentration of greenhouse gasesand the changes in global mean temperature arecommon indicators for climate change. Theseindicators remain of limited direct use forenvironmental performance reviews as theycannot be related to a particular country’senvironmental performance.

Indicators of societal responses: efforts toreduce GHG emissions include a large number ofindividual actions and policy instruments (taxes,regulations, subsidies etc.), mostly designed toimprove energy efficiency. The different effortsare difficult to capture in a single indicator. It istherefore proposed to employ an indicator ofenergy efficiency, reflecting, at least partly,society’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gasemissions. Supplementary indicators such asenergy and CO2 tax rates and environmentalexpenditure should help to trace individual policyinstruments. As always, expenditure data need to

21


be put into the right context for appropriateinterpretation.Data availability: measures of energy efficiencyare not readily available. As a first step, it istherefore proposed to use energy intensitymeasures (Source: OECD/IEA), although theyreflect structural factors as well as changes inenergy efficiency. Data on government R&Dexpenditure on energy efficiency and alternativeenergy sources are partly available (Source:IEA); implicit and explicit tax rates on CO2 havealso been evaluated (Source: OECD), althoughcountry coverage is incomplete.

Issue 2: Stratospheric Ozone Depletion

Environmental concern and policy relevance :in 1974 it was discovered that chlorine-containingsubstances pose a threat to the ozone layer.Ozone is mainly found in an atmospheric layer atstratospheric altitudes, between 20 and 40kilometres, and acts as a shield against harmfulsolar ultra-violet radiation.

In 1985, the Vienna Convention for the Protectionof the Ozone Layer was signed, followed by theMontreal Protocol and London and CopenhagenAmendments on Substances that Deplete theOzone Layer.

Indicators of environmental pressures :principal among the ozone-depleting substancesare CFCs, halons, methyl chloroform and carbontetrachloride, and HCFCs, plus methyl bromide.Individual substances vary considerably in theirozone-depleting capacity. To reflect the combineddepletion capacity, the apparent consumption ofeach individual substance has to be weighted inproportion to its ozone-depleting potential relativeto CFC-11.Data availability: CFC-11 and CFC-12 account forhalf of the ozone-depleting substances and aretherefore proposed as parameters. Actualemissions of CFCs are difficult to measure butproduction or apparent consumption can be usedas a proxy. Data on halons are less readilyavailable so that a short-run indicator will beconfined to CFCs (Source: OECD).

Indicators of environmental conditions : firstchoices for an indicator of environmentalconditions are the global atmosphericconcentration of ozone-depleting substances, and,closer to effects, the radiation of UV-B at ground

level. Changes in the concentration of CFC-11and CFC-12 help to track the magnitude and rateof change of the atmospheric reservoir of themost abundant ozone-depleting substances. Asin the case of greenhouse gases, the indicatorremains of limited use in the specific context ofenvironmental performance reviews as it cannotbe related to a particular country and itsenvironmental performance. A second indicator,more closely associated with particular countries,is the trend in stratospheric ozone levels overselected measurement points.Data availability: information on globalatmospheric CFC concentrations is readilyavailable. Trend data of ozone concentrations forindividual monitoring stations are available for 19OECD countries.

Indicators of societal responses: recoveryrates of CFC and society’s expenditure for thatpurpose as well as for replacement technologiesare possible indicators. Important contextualinformation is the extent to which a country hascommitted itself to the phasing-out of CFCs.These targets could then be compared toenvironmental pressures in terms of productionand/or consumption of CFCs. A different indicatorfor governments’ specific efforts at theinternational level are countries’ contributions tothe Interim Multilateral Fund associated with theMontreal protocol. The fund, which wasestablished on a pilot basis for three years, aimsat helping developing countries to adoptreplacements for CFCs.Data availability: information on CFC recoveryrates is scattered and virtually no data arecurrently obtainable for expenditure on CFCrecovery or replacement.

22





Index of apparentconsumption* ofozone-depletingsubstances

M

Apparent consumption ofCFCshalons

SM


Atmosphericconcentration of ozone-depleting substancesUV-B radiation atground level

M

M

Atmosphericconcentration of CFCsStratospheric ozonelevels over selectedareas

S

S/M

Societal responses:

CFC recovery rates M

Expenditure for CFCrecovery andreplacement technologiesCountries’ contributionsto the Interim Fundassociated with theMontreal Protocol

L

M

*Apparent consumption equals production plusimports minus exports.

Issue 3: Eutrophication

Environmental concern and policy relevance :The consequences of over-nourishment of

aquatic plants (eutrophication) has become amajor problem of water pollution in Membercountries, affecting surface water, groundwaterand marine waters. Excess nutrients can also befound in soil and sediments. The annual meanconcentration of nitrates has, for example, beenincreasing at the downstream frontiers of rivers,

mainly as a reflection of pollution from agriculturalorigins such as animal manure or excessfertilizers.

Acceptable levels of dissolved oxygen andnutrient levels in receiving waters have beenestablished in national and international standardsand agreements such as the International JointCommission Agreement on Great Lakes Water

23


Quality in North America.




Emissions of N and Pinto water and soil

L

Apparent consumption offertilizers, measured inN,PWaste water dischargesLivestock density

S

MS/M


BOD/DO, concentrationof N and P in inlandandmarine waters

S/MM/L

Societal responses:

Percentage ofpopulation connectedto sewage treatmentwith biological and/orchemical treatment

M/L

Percentage of populationconnected to wastewater treatmentUser charges for wastewater treatmentMarket share ofphosphate-freedetergents

S

M

S/M

Indicators of environmental pressures : acomplete set of pressure indicators wouldcomprise emissions of nitrogen and phosphatefrom manure, fertilizer, domestic and industrialwaste water, sewage sludge, dredge spoil andsolid waste, corrected for the absorption ofphosphates and nitrogen by crops. This could befurther extended to reflect a proper nutrientbalance.Data availability: at the international level, fewdata are available for the entire range of emissionsources of phosphorus or nitrogen as well as forthe absorption of phosphates and nitrogen bycrops. Currently, measurements are confined tothe apparent consumption of fertilizers and

general information on waste water discharges.Aggregate amounts of fertilizers must bemeasured in terms of N or P to account fordifferent types of fertilizers. Livestock densityprovides a rough but measurable proxy forpotential eutrophication from manure.

Indicators of environmental conditions : directindicators of the extent of eutrophication relate tothe phosphate and nitrate contents of inland andmarine waters. Biological oxygen demand ofwater bodies or the degree of dissolved oxygencan also be considered indicative ofeutrophication.Measuring excess nutrients in soil complicatesmatters significantly. The focus of indicators istherefore on water. A general problem related toindicators of ambient quality is how to carry outspatial aggregation to present meaningful nationalfigures: forming averages is seldom a satisfactorysolution so that often data of representative sitesare shown rather than national figures.Data availability: at the international level, dataare available for BOD, phosphate and nitrateconcentrations for selected rivers in OECDcountries (Source: OECD).

Indicators of societal responses: severalindicators would appear useful to show society’sefforts towards reducing eutrophication andexcess nutrients: the extent of chemical and/orbiological waste water treatment, the extent towhich levies on sewage water treatment coveractual costs, the market share of phosphate-freedetergents. For non-point sources, in particularagricultural ones, an indicator reflecting bestfarming practices could be introduced.Data availability: for OECD countries, data onthe share of the population connected to sewagetreatment plants are available in the short run(Source: OECD). Information on the type oftreatment and on waste water charges remainspartial. Data on the market share of phosphate-free detergents should be available more easily(Source: industry associations).

24


Issue 4: Acidification

Environmental concern and policy relevance: in the




Index of acidifyingsubstances

M/L

Emissions of SOx andNOxammoniac

SM


Exceedence of thecritical loads ofpotential acid in waterand soil

S/M

Concentration in acidprecipitations (pH, SO4,NO3)Total depositions ofacidifying substances

SM

Societal responses:

Percentage of car fleetequipped with catalyticconvertersCapacity of SOx andNOx abatementequipment of stationarysources

S/M

M/L

Expenditure for airpollution abatement S

atmosphere, emissions of sulphur and nitrogencompounds are transformed into acidifying substancessuch as sulphuric and nitric acid. When thesesubstances reach the ground, acidification of soil,water and buildings arises. Soil acidification is oneimportant factor causing forest damage. Acidificationof the aquatic environment may severely impair thelife of plant and animal species.

Problems of acidification have triggered severalinternational agreements to reduce emissions, e.g., the1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary AirPollution and the 1985 Helsinki Protocol on thereduction of sulphur emissions as well as the 1988

Sophia Protocol on the control of emissions ofnitrogen oxides.

Indicators of environmental pressures: as sulphurand nitrogen compounds are at the source ofacidification, emissions of SOx, NOx and NH3 providemeaningful indicators of environmental pressures.

Data availability: international data on SOx and NOxemissions are immediately available (Source: OECD);information on NH3 is more difficult to obtain at theinternational level.

Indicators of environmental conditions: there areseveral possibilities to reflect the state of acidificationof soil and water: a) by means of an indicator of acidprecipitations and/or depositions (exceedence of thecritical loads of potential acids in soils and waters);b) by means of the direct indication of the pH-value oflakes or soil; c) through indirect measures such as thecrown density of forest.

Data availability: for the short-run, onlyconcentrations of acidifying substances in precipitationcan be measured at the international level (Source:OECD). Data on depositions, exceedence of criticalloads and measurements of pH-values in surfacewaters and soil are available in a number of countries(Source: EMEP, OECD) but further efforts to improvedata collection and harmonization are neededinternationally.

Indicators of societal responses: physical andexpenditure data on the capacity of equipment to abateSOx and NOx emissions provide meaningful indicatorswith respect to industry’s efforts. Households’ effortscould be reflected through the percentage of the carfleet equipped with catalytic converters. Moregenerally, efforts of environmental policy could becaptured through comparison between ambientstandards for SO2 and NO2 concentrations.

Data availability: currently, data on pollutionabatement expenditure are only available for airpollution abatement as a whole, including expenditurefor non-acidifying air emission abatement (Source:OECD). Partial information is at hand for physicalequipment, in particular for utilities. A comparison ofambient air standards necessitates further work tomake them comparable across countries.

25


Issue 5: Toxic Contamination

Environmental concern and policy relevance :




Emissions of heavymetalsEmissions of organiccompounds

M/L

L

Consumption ofPb,Hg,Cd,NiApparent consumption ofpesticidesa

Generation of hazardouswaste

S/MS/M

S/M


Concentration of heavymetals and organiccompounds inenvironmental mediaand living species

L

Concentration of lead,cadmium, chromium,copper in rivers

S/M

Societal responses:

Changes of toxiccontents in productsand productionprocesses

L

Rehabilitated areas aspercentage of total areasidentified ascontaminatedMarket share ofunleaded petrol

L/M

S

a) See notes below concerning problems ofmeasurement and comparability.

human activities lead to emissions andaccumulation of toxic substances in environmentalmedia and living species and present danger tohuman and ecosystem health. A number ofinternational agreements extend to the control oftoxic substances (e.g. 1989 Basel Convention on

hazardous wastes). Agenda 21 also refers to thesafer use of toxic chemicals and the managementof hazardous waste.

Indicators of environmental pressures : thelarge number of toxic substances necessitates aselection based on risk assessments andquantities of individual substances. To the extentthat such selections already exist, they could beexamined for their relevance to performancereviews. Two major types of toxic substancescould be considered: heavy metals and organiccompounds, including pesticides. Currently, nointernationally agreed list of substances withappropriate weighting factors exists. Indicatorsrelate therefore to the consumption of selectedindividual toxic substances. Among heavy metals,consumption of lead, cadmium, mercury andnickel can be traced. Among organic substances,the consumption of pesticides is a first steptowards a more comprehensive indicator. It is,however, important to recognise the differencesamong pesticides concerning toxicity, persistenceand mobility. A less direct, but more readilymeasurable, indicator of potential toxiccontamination is the generation of hazardouswaste.Data availability: data on the apparentconsumption of pesticides (measured in tonnes ofactive ingredients) exist for a number of countries(Source: OECD) although problems ofinternational comparability remain significant;there are data on the use of lead for many OECDcountries (Source: OECD); information on theuse of cadmium, mercury and nickel is morescattered. Data are available on the generation ofhazardous waste (Source: OECD).

Indicators of environmental conditions :indicators concerning the condition of toxiccontamination of the environment should showambient concentrations of the various toxicsubstances in different environmental media andliving species.Data availability: short-run data availabilityconfines empirical evaluations at the internationallevel to indications of concentrations of key heavymetals in inland waters (Source: OECD).

26


Indicators of societal responses: many ofsociety’s responses concerning toxiccontamination consist of regulations concerningnotification, treatment and use of toxicsubstances. Typically, such responses aredifficult to reflect in concise and internationallycomparable indicators. A first choice to measuresociety’s response are the changes in toxiccontents of products and production processes,although such an indicator would need furtherelaboration. A more specific response concerningsoil is society’s actions and decisions to identify,assess and clean up contaminated sites. Anassociated indicator is the percentage ofrehabilitated areas in the total area identified ascontaminated. Another partial but measurableindicator is the market share of unleaded petrol.Data availability: in the short run, only data theon market share of unleaded petrol are available.

Issue 6: Urban Environmental Quality

Environmental concern and policy relevance :an increasing part of the population of OECDcountries is living in urban areas. Most pollutionsources are found in or near urban areas, andother forms of environmental degradation alsotend to occur with greatest severity in urbanareas. As a result of the combination of thesefactors, the greatest potential for human exposureto deteriorating environmental conditions occurs inurban areas.

The promotion of sustainable human settlements,in particular urban ones, is an item explicitlyconsidered in Agenda 21.

Indicators of environmental pressures : inprinciple, most environmental pressures apply,although at an urban scale. As the first choice forindicators, it is proposed to focus on keyenvironmental pressures, i.e., air emissions (NOx,SOx, particulates, CO) and noise. Noise, whichcan be considered both a pressure and acondition, is dealt with under environmentalconditions. These proximate pressure indicatorsare accompanied by selected indicators of indirectpressures such as traffic density (measured e.g.through car holdings per capita) and the degree ofurbanisation (measured e.g. through percentageof population living in cities with more than 1million inhabitants).

Data availability: for emissions, data availability atthe international level is constrained by the needto collect information at the urban level. Data ontraffic density is readily available for countryaverages and for many individual cities (Source:OECD). Information on the degree ofurbanisation can be obtained from otherinternational sources.

Indicators of environmental conditions :indicators of urban environmental conditions cutacross the various media. They include thequality of urban air, drinking water, ambientsurface and ground water. Whereas the quality ofdrinking water is an important factor in the urbanquality of life, it only partly reflects environmentalconditions as high-quality tap water can simplyreflect an efficient treatment system. First choiceindicators of environmental conditions relate to theexposure of population to air pollution and tonoise. The quality of ambient surface and groundwater is also a first choice indicator. It reflectsenvironmental conditions and, often, the pre-treatment quality of drinking water.

Data availability: internationally comparable dataexist for concentrations of major air pollutants(Source: OECD) but information on exposure ismore scattered. Additional efforts of datacollection are also needed to obtaincomprehensive information on ambient waterquality in urban areas.

27


Indicators of societal responses: indicators of




Urban air emissions:SOx, NOx, VOC

M

Traffic densityDegree of urbanisation

S/MS/M


Exposure of populationto:-air pollutants-noiseAmbient waterconditions in urbanareas

MSM

Concentration of airpollutants

S

Societal responses:

Changes in green spaceas a percentage of totalurban area/total urbanpopulationRegulations onemissions and noiselevels for new carsExpenditure on watertreatment and noiseabatement

M/L

M

S/M

societal responses to urban environmentalproblems cut through the whole range ofmeasures so that there is no single first choiceindicator. Key areas for indicators are traffic(regulations on emissions and noise levels fornew cars) and green space (with changes ingreen space compared to total urban area).Expenditure on noise abatement and watertreatment complete the picture.

Data availability: due to definitional problems,data on green space is not available in aninternationally comparable form. Information on

car regulations and expenditure should beavailable with some additional effort.

28


Issues 7 and 8: Biological Diversity and Landscape





Habitat alteration andconversion of landfrom its natural state

L

Land use changesIntroduction of newgenetic material andspecies

S

L


Threatened or extinctspecies as a share ofknown species

S

Societal responses:

Protected areas as apercentage of total areaby ecosystem type

SL

Protected species as apercentage of threatenedspecies

M/L

biological diversity can be defined as thevariability among living organisms from all sourcesincluding terrestrial, marine and other aquaticecosystems and the ecological complexes ofwhich they are part; this includes diversity withinspecies, between species and of ecosystems. Anecosystem is a dynamic complex of plant, animaland micro-organism communities and their non-living environment interacting as a functional unit.

The broad and complex nature of biodiversitywould, ideally, suggest a treatment at threedifferent levels:a) the ecosystem level, dealing with thecombination of physical and biological elements;b) the population or species level dealing with thechange in the number of species due to alterationof living conditions by man; c) genetic diversitywithin species.

One of the major outcomes of the United NationsConference on Environment and Development in1992 was the signing of the Convention onBiological Diversity by over 150 governments.

Landscape: Specific types of human land use,such as certain agricultural practices, road andhouse building, hydropower projects, drainage ofwetland, forestry and mining may pose a threat toecosystems, and thus a form of environmentalpressure on landscape. In addition, landscapecan be seen as a part of environmental quality assuch, important to humans for ethical, aestheticand cultural reasons. Thus, degradation oflandscape entails both a loss of naturalness andhistoric cultural values. So far, no internationallyagreed definition of landscape exists and noattempt has been made to develop landscapeindicators in this report.

Indicators of environmental pressures : threetypes of pressures on biodiversity have beenidentified: physical ones (e.g. habitat alteration);chemical ones (e.g. exposure to contaminants);biological ones (e.g. release of alien species,fishing). The main chemical pressures arecovered by issue 3,4 and 5. Some of thebiological pressures are captured in issues 10 and11, some of the physical pressures appear, forexample, in issue 13. Here, indicators arefocused on additional physical and biologicalpressures. Indicators of habitat alteration and theconversion of land from its natural state wouldreflect such pressures. Increasing use of land foragricultural purposes is suggested as ameasurable proxy for environmental pressure.Data availability: there are internationallycomparable data on land use changes (Source:FAO, OECD).

Indicators of environmental conditions : themost frequently used indicator of the state ofbiodiversity is the number of threatened or extinctspecies over the number of known species.Data availability: international data exist forthreatened or extinct species as a percentage ofknown species (Source: OECD).

Indicators of societal responses: responses toprotect biodiversity and landscape includemeasures to protect areas, ecosystems and

29


species and to create biosphere reservesrepresentative of different ecosystems. Thesuggested indicators of societal responses aretherefore the size of protected areas by type ofecosystem and the number of protected species.Data availability: information on the number andextent of protected areas is available (Source:IUCN) but comparability is not sufficient to providecoverage of different types of ecosystems. Datadevelopment work is also necessary to quantifythe share of protected species.

Issue 9: Waste





Waste generation:-- municipal waste-- industrial waste-- nuclear waste-- hazardous waste

SSS

S/M

Environmental conditions:Not applicable

Societal responses:

Waste minimisationefforts

L

Charges for wastedisposalExpenditure on wastecollection and treatmentWaste recycling andrecovery rates

M

S

S

different types and quantities of solid waste aregenerated by human activities in OECD countries:municipal waste (mainly from households),industrial waste, nuclear waste and other typesincluding waste from energy production,agricultural production, mining, and demolition aswell as dredge spoils and sewage sludge. Thequantity of wastes produced in OECD countrieshas been steadily increasing. Wastes havepotential impact on human health and theenvironment, and waste management issues areat the centre-stage of many countries’environmental concerns.

Several international agreements and rules existfor the transfrontier movements of hazardouswaste: Directives of the European Community,OECD Decisions and Recommendations, theLomé IV Convention and the Basel Convention.Management of solid waste and sewage is alsoan item explicitly considered in Agenda 21,endorsed by UNCED in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.

Indicators of environmental pressures : wastepresents a potential environmental pressure forsoil, water, air and landscape. The actualenvironmental pressure depends, however, almostexclusively on the waste handling and depositionpractices. Any indicator on the amounts of wastegenerated is therefore only a first approximationof environmental pressure and more informationwill be needed on the actual environmentalpressure. In addition, the composition of wastewill influence its potential environmental impacts.Total amounts of waste generated shouldtherefore be broken down by principal source, i.e.,municipal, industrial and nuclear waste. It shouldbe noted that the indicator on "generation ofhazardous waste" is present both under the"waste" issue and the issue on toxiccontamination.

Data availability: waste generation by majorsource can be evaluated for most OECD countries(Source: OECD). Many uncertainties concerningthe quality of waste data and their internationalcomparability do remain, however.

Indicators of environmental conditions : wasteacts as a pressure on the environment; noindicators of environmental conditions cantherefore be directly associated with the issue"waste". Changes in environmental conditionsdue to waste are reflected in various other issues

30


such as toxic contamination (Issue 5) orlandscape (Issue 7).

Indicators of societal responses: society’sresponses have been mainly directed towards thecollection, treatment and disposal of waste.Increasingly, waste management efforts areaiming at waste minimisation. This is reflected inthe first-choice indicator. Charges for wastedisposal are an indicator for an instrument toincite waste minimisation. Total expenditure onwaste collection, treatment and disposal providesa general indication of society’s financial efforts todeal with waste. Indicators on rates of wasterecycling and recovery and charges for wastedisposal complete the picture.

Data availability: data on waste recycling andrecovery are available at the international level(Source: OECD), although further efforts will benecessary to complete international coverage andcomparability.

Issue 10: Water Resources





Intensity of use ofwater resources S

Share of dischargedwaste water in rivers

M/L


Frequency, durationand extent of watershortages

M

Societal responses:

Water prices and usercharges for wastewater treatment aspercentage of cost

M

fresh water resources are of major environmentaland biological importance because water is a

basic support element for human life andecosystems. Water withdrawal can be a majorpressure on freshwater resources: in more aridregions, water resources may at times be limitedto an extent where the demand for public watersupply, agricultural purposes or industrialprocesses can be met only by going beyond asustainable use of the resource in terms ofquantity and possibly of quality. Informationavailable for OECD countries suggests that waterwithdrawal has increased over the past twodecades, contributing both to quantity and qualityproblems of water supply. Although the qualityand quantity aspects of freshwater resources areinterlinked, the present issue deals primarily withthe quantity aspect of the resource.

The protection and the preservation of fresh waterresources is an item explicitly considered inAgenda 21, endorsed by UNCED in Rio deJaneiro in 1992.

Indicators of environmental pressures : anecessary condition for sustainable use of waterresources is that the withdrawal of water does notexceed the renewal of the stocks over anextended period. An indicator tracing the intensityof the use of water resources is therefore theappropriate measure. This indicator would be

31


defined as the (gross or net) withdrawal of waterresources, divided by the renewal of waterresources. As opposed to net withdrawal, grosswithdrawal accounts for total water withdrawalwithout deducting water that is reinserted into thenatural environment after use. Whereas the useof a figure representing net withdrawals focuseson the quantitative side of water use, the use ofgross withdrawals has a qualitative component:even if water is reinserted into the naturalenvironment, it tends to be of inferior quality afteruse.

At the same time, it must be kept in mind that ameasure of intensity based on a national averagemay be misleading, in particular for largecountries: major differences in regional water usemay not be adequately reflected in the nationalindicator.

Data availability: information on the intensity ofthe use of water resources is available for mostOECD countries (Source: OECD).

Indicators of environmental conditions : waterresources are characterised by a significantvariance of stocks, during different times of theyear as well as between different years. Thesevariations are likely to affect water quality andecological equilibria. An indicator to measurethese variations would take into account theduration and the extent of a shortage of watersupply. At its extremes, in the form of droughtsand floods, the question of regularity alsopresents a specific dimension of environmentalrisks.

Data availability: none of the indicators ofenvironmental conditions are immediatelyavailable at international level.

Indicators of societal responses: society’sefforts to reduce unsustainable water use consistof either measures constraining the quantities ofwater available or measures increasing the priceof water to encourage efficient use. The price ofwater and the charges for waste water treatmentare therefore proposed as suitable indicators. Putin relation to actual cost of water treatment andsupply, the resulting ratio gives an indication ofthe direct accountability of consumers of water forthe use of the natural resource.

Data availability: data on water prices and usercharges are only partly available (Source: OECD)and need further development.

32


Issue 11: Forest Resources





Short-run sustainedyield/actual harvest

S/M


Area/volume anddistribution of forests

S

Share ofdisturbed/deterioratedforest in total forest area

M/L

Societal responses:

Percentage of harvestarea sucessfullyregenerated (incl. naturalregeneration) orafforested

M/L

Percentage of protectedforest area in total forestarea

M

forests are among the most diverse andwidespread ecosystems on earth. Forestresources have many functions: they providetimber; they provide ecosystem services includingregulation of soil, air and water quality; theyprovide recreation benefits; they are a reservoirfor biodiversity and act as a carbon sink. Thereis general concern over human impact on foresthealth and the natural processes of forest growthand regeneration.Combatting deforestation to preserve soils, water,air and biological diversity is an item explicitlyconsidered in Agenda 21, endorsed by UNCED inRio de Janeiro in 1992.

Indicators of environmental pressures : theharvest rate set by any country is a function of thesize of its forests, the proportion of the forest areadedicated to timber production, the productivity ofthe forest and the age class structure of theforest, and management objectives and sustainedyield policies of the country. The indicator relating

sustained yield to actual harvest expresses therelative balance between forest growth andharvest, considering forest characteristics such asage classes. The sustained yield in NorthAmerica would reflect aggregate allowable annualcut, and in other OECD countries could reflectcurrent growth rates or increments of forestestate.

Data availability: information on short runsustained yield is available for many OECDcountries, or can be derived with standardformulas.

Indicators of environmental conditions : thestate of forest resources can be representedthrough a measure of total forest area or volume.This information can be supplemented by moreprecise indicators incorporating species groups,maturity classes, and rates of disturbance bynatural and anthropogenic forces such as forestfires.

Data availability: data on the area, volume anddistribution of forests and the types of disturbanceare readily available (Source: OECD/FAO/UN-ECE).

Indicators of societal responses: a majorsocietal response to preserve forest resourcesrelates to the efforts of regeneration andafforestation of harvested areas. The protectionof forest areas is also an element in the overallconservation effort although it applies at leastequally to concerns about the loss of biodiversity.

Data availability: data on total protected forestareas are available for a significant number ofcountries, although a breakdown by IUCNcategory necessitates additional data developmentwork. Similarly, more data development isneeded before efforts of regeneration andafforestation can be presented in aninternationally comparable way.

33


Issue 12: Fish Resources





Fish catches S


Size of spawningstocks

M

Overfished areas M/L

Societal responses:

Number of stocksregulated by quotas

M

Expenditure for fish stockmonitoring M/L

by the end of the 1980s, marine fisheries yieldedbetween 80 and 90 million tonnes of fish, with anoverall trend that has been increasing by over40 percent during the past two decades. Many ofthe more valuable fish stocks are overfished, andthe steady trend towards increased global fishlandings is achieved partly through exploitation ofnew and/or less valuable species. Coastaldevelopment has also turned out to be asignificant pressure on fish stocks. Over-exploitation can be found both with freshwaterand marine fish stocks. As with other naturalresources, the quality of fish resources (existenceof diseases, contamination etc.) is in itself animportant factor for the quantity of the resources.The current issue on fish resources focuses onmarine fish resources but extends to freshwaterfish resources. Stocks associated withaquaculture are, however, explicitly excluded fromcurrent considerations.

The protection and sustainable management ofoceans to prevent over-fishing and degradation ofcoastlines and coral reefs are items explicitlyconsidered in Agenda 21, endorsed by UNCED inRio de Janeiro in 1992. In addition, there are a

number of international agreements such as thosereached under the Northwest Atlantic FisheriesOrganization.

Indicators of environmental pressures : OECDcountries play an important role in world fisheriesand the trend in national fish catches is a primaryindicator for the pressure exerted on fish stocks.As it is difficult to allocate fish stocks to nationalboundaries, it is not possible to calculate ratios ofsustainable use (fish catches over growth ofstock) on a national basis. Nonetheless fisheriesand environment remain relevant topics forenvironmental performance reviews. Wherenational quotas exist, fish catches can be relatedto them to get an indicator of potential over-exploitation.

Data availability: fish catches and production dataare available at significant detail and for mostOECD countries (Source: OECD/FAO).

Indicators of environmental conditions : thesize of spawning stocks is a relevant indicator forenvironmental conditions if it can be related to ameasure of sustainability. Defining andmeasuring sustainability remains, however, adifficult task. A different indicator would presentoverfished areas, although this indicator needsfurther elaboration. Again, it is difficult toassociate fish stocks with a particular country.

Data availability: data on the size of major fishpopulations exist but are scattered across nationaland international sources.

Indicators of societal responses: acomprehensive indicator for countries’ efforts toprotect fish stocks would include information onthe various types of expenditure for this purposeas well as information on restrictions on landingsof fish. Supplementary indicators for societalresponses include expenditure for the monitoringof fish stocks. Other responses such as the useof environmentally friendly fish- catching methodsare important but difficult to make operational in asingle indicator.

Data availability: no data are readily available onthe expenditure for the protection of fish stocks.

34


35


Issue 13: Soil Degradation (Erosion and Desertification)





Erosion risk: potentialand actual use of soilfor agriculture

L

Land use changes S


Degree of top soillosses

M

Societal responses:

Rehabilitated areas M/L

desertification and erosion are processes ofphysical land degradation caused by humanimpact and by changes in climate. Soil erosionarises when the rate of new soil formation isinferior to soil losses. When soil quality andmoisture content decline, a productive semi-aridregion can be converted into a desert, a processknown as desertification. The environmentalproblems of erosion and desertification are large.Seventy percent of the world’s drylands arealready affected by degradation. This is onequarter of the world’s land. Although the problemis most severe in the developing world, a numberof OECD countries are equally affected. Soildegradation is not limited to physical degradationbut encompasses problems such as toxiccontamination, excess nutrients, salinisation andacidification. These problems of soil quality aredealt with under the respective issues.

The promotion of sustainable land managementpractices to prevent erosion and soil degradationas well as combatting desertification and droughtare two prominent items in Agenda 21, endorsedby UNCED in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.

Indicators of environmental pressures : primaryfactors in erosion and desertification areunsustainable land use, including farming and

grazing. Land use changes as for instance fromforest to agriculture, could therefore be ameaningful, though general, indicator for thedanger of erosion and desertification. A morespecific indicator would be the comparisonbetween potential and actual use of land foragricultural purposes. To the extent that theactual use of land for agriculture exceeds thecarrying capacity of land, this provides anindication for the risk of erosion and soildegradation.

Data availability: data on the actual use of landare available throughout OECD countries (Source:OECD). Information on the risk of erosion and onpotential use of land is still very scarce and doesnot permit indicator development in the short run.

Indicators of environmental conditions : thedegree and extent of erosion is best indicatedthrough the degree and extent of top soil losses,terrain deformation and overblowing.

Data availability: at present, data on the degreeand extent of soil degradation are available butnot at a national level (WRI, International SoilReference and Information Centre).

Indicators of societal responses: it is difficult topinpoint all specific efforts to combat erosion anddesertification. One relevant and measurableeffort to counter soil degradation is the size ofrehabilitated areas; it is suggested as a first-choice and though general indicator in this contextwhich would need further specification. Indicatorscould also be developed related to bestmanagement practices in agriculture.

Data availability: data on rehabilitated areas areat present not available at the international level.

36


General Indicators, Not Attributable to Specific Issues

Indicators of environmental pressures : general




Population growth anddensityGDP growthIndustrial productionEnergy supplyStructure of energysupplyRoad traffic volumesRoad vehicle stockAgricultural production

S

SS

SS

S

Societal responses:

EnvironmentalexpenditurePublic opinion

MS

Pollution abatement andcontrol expenditure S

indicators of environmental pressures consistmainly of indicators of indirect pressures(background indicators). The indicators presentedhere are the ones most commonly used andreadily available at the international level. Themain function of these indicators is to providecontextual information -- a key feature ofenv i ronmenta l pe r fo rmance rev iews .Achievements in pollution reduction, for example,must be seen in the context of economic growth:assessments will differ when reductions inpollution are achieved during periods of weak ordeclining economic activity rather than duringphases of strong economic growth.

Data availability: most data for these indicatorsare accessible without difficulty for a large numberof OECD countries.

Indicators of societal responses: two majorgeneral indicators of societal responses aresuggested: a) environmental expenditure at thenational level and for broad economic sectors

(public sector, business sector, households):although expenditure, when considered by itself,does not provide any information on the state ofthe environment, it is a useful indicator for thefinancial efforts undertaken by society to mitigateor abate pollution; b) public opinion onenvironmental issues: this indicator aims atcapturing one of the major factors in triggeringsocietal responses by government, business andhouseholds. A third, more general, areasuggested for indicator development isenvironmental information: examples of thesesocietal responses are the introduction of eco-labels or regular reports on the state of theenvironment.

Data availability: many OECD countries collectdata on environmental expenditure, although theyare often limited to pollution abatement andcontrol activities. Such data have been compiledby OECD. Similarly, information on public opinionin Member countries is available from OECD. AtOECD level, no comprehensive and internationallycomparable information exists currently as to theuse of eco-labels.

37


Figure 5 Summary of Short-Term Indicatorsa by Environmental Issueb

PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE

Issues Indicators ofenvironmental

pressures


conditions


responses

1. Climate change Emissions of CO2 Atmosphericconcentrations ofgreenhouse gasesGlobal mean temperature

Energy intensity

2. Stratosphericozone depletion

Apparent consumption ofCFCs

Atmosphericconcentration of CFCs

3. Eutrophication Apparent consumption offertilizers, measured in N,P

BOD, DO, N and P inselected rivers

% of populationconnected to wastewater treatmentplants

4. Acidification Emissions of SOx andNOx

Concentrations in acidprecipitations (pH, SO4,NO3)

Expenditure for airpollution abatement

5. Toxiccontamination

Generation of hazardouswaste

Concentration of lead,cadmium, chromium,copper in selected rivers

Market share ofunleaded petrol

6. Urbanenvironmentalquality

Concentrations of SO2,NO2, particulates inselected cities

7&8 Biological diversityand landscape

Land use changes Threatened or extinctspecies as % of knownspecies

Protected areas as% of total area

9. Waste Generation of municipal,industrial, nuclear,hazardous waste

not applicable Expenditure onwaste collection andtreatmentWaste recyclingrates (paper andglass)

10. Water resources Intensity of use of waterresources

11. Forest resources Area, volume anddistribution of forests

12. Fish resources Fish catches

13. Soil degradation(desertification anderosion)

Land use changes

14. General indicators,not attributable tospecific issues

Population growth anddensityGDP growthIndustrial and agric.productionEnergy supply andstructureRoad traffic and vehiclestock

not applicable Pollution abatementand controlexpenditurePublic opinion onthe environment

a) Only indicators which are available in the short term at international level are shown in this table. See Chapter 3 for otherindicators. This table identifies key elements of indicators: at this point, no normalisation with respect to GDP, population,etc. is suggested. See Chapter 3 on use of indicators for a discussion.

b) For a brief discussion of each individual issue, see Chapter 3.

38

OECD Core Set of Indicators References

SELECTED OECD PUBLICATIONS

Environmental Data

OECD (1985), Environmental Data: Compendium 1985OECD (1987), Environmental Data: Compendium 1987OECD (1989), Environmental Data: Compendium 1989OECD (1991), Environmental Data: Compendium 1991OECD (1993), Environmental Data: Compendium 1993

Environmental Reporting

OECD (1985), The State of the Environment 1985OECD (1991), The State of the Environment 1991

Environmental Indicators

OECD (1991), Environmental Indicators: Progress ReportOECD (1991), Environmental Indicators: A Preliminary SetOECD (1993), Environmental Information Systems and Indicators: A Review of Selected Central

and Eastern European CountriesOECD (1993), Indicators for the Integration of Environmental Concerns into Energy Policies, OECD

Environment MonographOECD (1993), Indicators for the Integration of Environmental Concerns into Transport Policies,

OECD Environment MonographOECD (1993), Pollution Abatement and Control Expenditure in OECD Countries, OECD

Environment MonographOECD (1991), Pollution Abatement and Control Expenditure in OECD Countries, OECD

Environment Monograph

Environmental Performance Reviews

OECD (1993), OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: GermanyOECD (1993), OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: IcelandOECD (1993), OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: NorwayOECD (1993), OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Portugal

39

GENERAL DISTRIBUTION OCDE/GD(93)179 ENVIRONMENT …

Documents