General criteria for the selection of performance indicators in the context of sustainable development
It is usually not the lack of measures that is hindering the evaluation
of an individual's or institution's performance, but the overwhelming
abundance of potentially useful indicators. What is a good and
a bad measure tends to vary with one's weltanschauung or
worldview, including such factors as level of education, cultural
background, economic status, political affiliation, gender, and
so on. Selection criteria are guidelines that one creatively applies
to establish a preference for the "best" indicators
that fit the needs and circumstances of a given region, institution,
and at the same time enhance adaptive planning capacities for
sustainable development. At a time of increased globalisation
they should help create a minimum level of comparability, coherence
and consistency between measures, and perhaps more importantly
between the way these measures are applied under real life circumstances
as well
The following criteria have been selected on the basis of extensive
knowledge of the indicator literature and practical experience
with performance measurement. Although the list contains some
of the most obvious and most frequently quoted criteria, it is
incomplete. But then, is it possible to compile a complete list
of loosely defined guidelines that deal with the endless complexity
of human decisions that emerge in the context of sustainable development?
- Policy relevance
Can the indicator be brought into association in a major way with
one or several issues around which key policies are formulated?
Sustainability indicators are intended for human audiences to
improve the outcome of decision-making on levels ranging from
individuals to the entire biosphere. Unless the indicator can
be linked by readers to critical decisions and policies, it is
unlikely to motivate action.
- Simplicity
Can the information be presented in an easily understandable,
appealing way to the target audience? Even complex issues and
calculations should eventually yield clearly presentable information
that the general public understands.
- Validity
Is the indicator a true reflection of the facts? Was the data
collected using scientifically defensible measurement techniques?
Is the indicator verifiable and reproducible? There is a need
for methodological rigor that makes the data credible for both
experts and laypeople.
- Time series data
Is time series data available, reflecting a trend of the indicator
over time? Based on one or two data points it is not possible
to visualize the direction the community may be going in the near
future.
- Availability of affordable data
Is good quality data available at a reasonable cost or is it feasible
to initiate a monitoring process that will make it available in
the future? Information tends to cost money, or at least time
and effort from many volunteers.
- Aggregability
Is the indicator about a very narrow or broader sustainability
issue? The list of potential sustainability indicators is endless.
For practical reasons, indicators that aggregate information on
broader issues should be preferred.
|
![[ Measurement & Indicators ]](/buttons/measstr.gif){kind=small}
![[ IISDnet Contents ]](/buttons/contents.gif){kind=small}