indicators for sustainable development governance · sustainable development, we can speak of the...
TRANSCRIPT
UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA
JĀNIS KAULI ŅŠ
INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOVERNANCE
SUMMARY OF THE DOCTORAL THESIS
to the degree of Dr.Geogr.
Branch: Environmental science
Sub-branch: Environmental management
Riga, 2015
2
The Doctroal thesis is developed and approved at the University of Latvia,
Faculty of Geography and Earth sciences from 2007-2015
Doctoral work is realised by support of European Social Funding
Doctoral thesis contains introduction, 6 chapters, conclusions, list of published papers. cited or used
sources and 20 appendices.
Scientific supervisor: Dr.h.Paed., prof. Raimonds Ernšteins
Reviewers:
1) Asoc.prof. Dr. geogr. Pēteris Šķiņķis, LU ĢZZF
2) Dr. geogr. Jānis Brizga
3) Prof. PhD Mart Külvik, The Estonian University of Life sciences, Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
Public defence of the Doctoral thesis to be held at an open session of Doctoral Council of
University of Latvia, Faculty of geography and geosciences
on January 21, 2015, at 14:00
Room 313, Alberta str. 10, Riga
The Doctoral thesis is available at Library of the University of Latvia, Kalpaka boulevard 4,
Riga. The opinions are to be sent to the Doctoral Council, the University of Latvia at Raiņa boulevard 19,
Riga, LV1586
Chairman of the Council
prof. Dr.biol. Viesturs Melecis
Secretary of the Council
asoc.prof. Dr.biol. Gunta Spriņģe
© University of Latvia, 2015
© Jānis Kauliņš, 2015
Eiropas Sociālā fonda projekts „Atbalsts doktora studijām Latvijas Universitātē ” Nr.2009/0138/ 1DP/1.1.2.1.2./ 09/IPIA/ VIAA/004.
3
ANNOTATION
The theoretical basis of the formation of the indicator systems for the governance of sustainable development (IS GSD) has been insufficiently developed and linked with the practice of integrated governance of the particular territory. The research has been completed about GSD indicators and models of IS and their development in the planning process of territorial development. The formulation of the indicator of GSD has been specified from the origin of which the prerequisites for the information provision of the indicator are derived, the domain and the functions of IS GSD in integrated governance. The relationship of indicator selection with indicator integration among sustainable environment and governance levels has been proved which is formulated as horizontal and vertical integration of IS. The results of the research are fully approbated by implementing IS GSD into municipal practice of governance of Saulkrasti district. The recommendations have been produced for the complementary implementation of indicator systems into different levels of governance.
Keywords: indicators, sustainability, development, governance, integration
CONTENTS
ABBREVIATURES ........................................................................................................ 4
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 4
1. TOPICALITY OF THE THEME AND NOVELTY OF THE RESEA RCH ........ 7 1.1. Tasks and objectives of doctoral thesis ............................................................. 7
1.2. The main scientific and practical novelties ..................................................... 10
1.3. Publications ........................................................................................................ 10
2. OVERVIEW OF DOCTORAL THESIS ................................................................ 14
2.1. Research methods applied ................................................................................ 15 2.2. Procedure of the reserach ................................................................................. 20
2.2.1. Integrated planning of sustainable development governance .............................. 20
2.2.2. Defining of sustainable development indicator .................................................... 21
2.2.3. Integrative properties of indicators ...................................................................... 23
2.2.4. Indicator systems and their integration into development planning process ....... 24
2.2.5. Indicator systems in state-level planning documents............................................ 27
3. THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS, RESULTS AND PROPOSALS ........................... 28 3.1. The main conclusions about indicators and their systems for the
governance of suatainable developemnt ....................................................... 28
3.2. Other scientific results ...................................................................................... 28 3.3. Practical results of the research ....................................................................... 29 3.4. Proposals ............................................................................................................ 32
SOURCES ...................................................................................................................... 34
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... 36
4
ABBREVIATURES
DEDUCE – Développement durable des Côtes Européennes, EU Interreg project
DPSIR – driving forces, pressures, stresses, impacts, responses
EEA – European Environment Agency
EIA – environmental impact assessment
FAO – Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
GID – Governance of integrated (sustainable) development
GIS – geographical information system
GSD – governance of sustainable development
ICLEI – International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives
ICZM – Integrated coastal zone management
IDRC – ICLEI International Development Research Centre
IS – indicator system
MK – Chamber of Ministers
NAP – National development plan 2014-2020
PKC – Cross-sectoral coordination center (along Bureau of Prime minister of Republic of Latvia)
SDS – sustainable development strategy
TAPIS – information system for territorial development planning
UN – United Nations
UNESCO – United Nations Organization for Education, Science and Culture
VARAM – Ministry of Environment Protection and Regional Development
VidM – Ministry of Environment (former)
WCED – World Commission on Environment and Development
INTRODUCTION It has already become clear in the middle of the last century that the
development process has its restrictions related to the finite character of the amount of resources. (Meadows et al., 1972). It became obvious that the successful development process can not be fully characterized by simple direct parameters or even sufficiently general characteristics of separate areas. While searching for the clues, the researchers came across the notions of sustainable development, that is, the models under which development can continue, at least, during several generations, at the same time, without depleting existing resources being at the disposal of the society (WCED, 1987). Summarizing the efforts of experts and manifestations of good will by politicians, during the historically important 1992 Rio conference, the declaration on environment and development was adopted (UN, 1992a), determining 27 basic principles and components of the model of global sustainable development. Simultaneously, the sustainable development action plan of methodological character was also approved- “Agenda for 21st century”(Agenda 21; UN, 1992b), which prescribes the routes towards the realization of sustainable development principles into practice of global governance. The significant part of this plan was the continuous observation of sustainability and its aspects, using quantitative and numerical assessment by the help of indicators, the chosen characteristic values.
5
Very significant part within the context of doctoral thesis is the adaptation of AGENDA 21 principles to the local planning levels, commonly known as the Local Agenda 21. Even though such term is not mentioned, it is proved that the sustainable development planning must be of integrative character, i.e., not only sustainability dimensions and community target groups have to be taken into account, but also their mutual relations and correlations (IDRC, ICLEI, 1996). One of the most important elements of governance of sustainable development, mentioned by Agenda 21 and Local Agenda 21 is the assessment principle of the planning process: the requirement for the measurability of the development targets and consequently, the measurement system with the requirement for periodical completion of such kind of measurements. Applying this principle for the specific planning documents, it means that the effects of quantitative assessment from completion of planned activities must be included there, which is based on using systems; that is measurements of indicators and structured “complex” of them, being of complementary character.
During the second half 1990s and particularly in the beginning of 21st century, at the time when practice of integrated development planning became more pronounced, the indicators were more often used as a policy planning instrument with increasing significance in the process of decision making. The environmental factors were the prevailing ones in the concept of sustainable development, but within course of time, economic and social factors gained more permanent meaning and these were supplemented by the fourth dimension – the governance (George, 2007). Nowadays this approach is widely accepted and UN is using it as a self-evident model (UNESCO, 2010). Therefore, it can be judged that fully embracing characteristics of sustainable development is possible when natural, economic, social and governance environments are reviewed in a balanced way. From the practical viewpoint of the realization of sustainable development, we can speak of the governance of sustainable development (GSD). While moving on from the models towards the real governance activities, i.e., sustainable development planning documents, it is possible to assert that the indicator system, correctly composed and applied, which is simultaneously related to four dimensions of the governance of sustainable development showing mutual relationships among them, will provide profound and extensive information for the decision makers and society.
On the international level, the indicator systems of the governance of sustainable development had been developing on the basis of earlier known environ-mental and economic indicator systems and came into the light right after approving the concept of Agenda 21. If initially, the great emphasis was placed on environmental indicators (Hammond, 1995), then after the concept of sustainability and sustainable development had advanced rapidly, the role of environmental, social and economic factors gradually became more evenly balanced (Meadows, 1998, Bossel, 1999). The great contribution into elaboration of indicator systems that can be practically applicable, has been given by FAO, not only gradually developing indicator systems of the assessment of different aspects of the world’s food sector, but also producing theoretical outlines and summarizing their conclusions (Brown, Reyntjens, 2005).
6
In Latvia, the indicators of the governance of sustainable development first appeared after 2000. Based on the three classic dimensions of sustainability, the indicator system of sustainable development was elaborated within the Ministry of Environment. The review of its indicators was first published in 2006 (VidM, 2006), but 2007 – the report about enacting of sustainable development in the country (VidM, 2007). The particular indicator system was related to the strategy of sustainable development of Latvia for the period of 2005-2010, but no quantitative goals were mentioned in the strategy. There is no connection with long term development planning documents of the country and no reflection of governance aspects offered by this system. The reviews after 2007 are not produced anymore.
The national environmental indicator system was strengthened by the regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers in 2009 (MK, 2009); the appropriate reports about environmental condition in the country are produced on irregular basis (Eindorfa, Smita u.c., 2008); information is restored in 2011 (VARAM, 2011).
Starting from 2006, the regular indicator system reviews have been produced by municipality of Riga (Rīga, 2006), however, this detailed indicator system is not integrated into the development planning documents of the city (Rīga, 2013a) and into the strategy (Rīga, 2013b). On the municipal level, for the first time in Latvia, the indicator system of GSD, as the part of integrated supervision system for the development documents, was introduced in the district of Saulkrasti in 2013, under the leadership of the author of doctoral thesis (The Strategy of long term development of district of Saulkrasti, 2013) but for the other 5 municipalities this is implemented into supervision system as a proposal.
The first state-level planning document in Latvia, where the indicator system was exclusively used for the progress monitoring of realization of the strategy of the planning documents, was the Strategy of Sustainable Development of Latvia till 2030 (VARAM, 2010), which in current version contains 56 indicators, grouped into 6 development priorities, bringing out common “strategic” indicator group. The supervision report based upon exactly the results produced by the indicator system has been prepared for this document in 2012 (Kauliņš u.c., 2012). The National Development Plan for 2014-2020 also contains the indicator system (PKC, 2012), classified as the basic instrument for supervision progress. It is assumed that the progress reports that are common to the strategy “Latvia -2030 and NDP, based upon indicator measurements are produced once in two years (NDP, paragraph 450 and 451).
In 2005-2007 Latvia participated in Interreg IIIc project DEDUCE „The European coast sustainability assessment model” the goal of which was to elaborate the sustainability model of European coast based on indicator measurements and to produce recommendations for the assessment of sustainability of European coast based on this model and appropriate indicator system in the whole European Union and to its separate member states. Within the framework of this particular project, working at the calculation of sustainability indicators for the Latvian coast and trying to adapt the proposed indicator to the circumstances of Latvia, the author of doctoral thesis came to
7
the conclusion that neither scientific nor practical literature provides appropriate answers related to the indicators and elaboration of indicator systems.
The indicator system formation models described at that time, were formed based upon functional analysis of system to be researched (Bossel, 2001) or the problem analysis of the territory (Rydin et al., 2003), but were not directly linked with the governance of the territory and consequently with the content of development planning documents. The latter being very important condition for the process of making governance decisions because such approach in formation of indicator systems provides extensive information about sustainability of the territory while at the same time makes it difficult the assessment of progress of governance planning documents.
Two basic approaches for the formulation of the definition for the indicator of governance of sustainable development are found in literature (Brown, Reyntjens, 2005):
� Conceptual approach which describes the general tasks of the indicator, without going deep into requirements for the selection of indicator and rather answering the question “Why do we need an indicator, what kind of information does it provide?”;
� Functional approach, defining specific functions of the indicator („What does indicator do, what kind of process is it involved in?”).
The available definitions of sustainable development indicator provided different kind of answers about the role of indicator in the governance of sustainable development, though not allowing understand which of the circumstances are important for the practical selection of the indicator from the range of possible parameters. Besides, these formulations contained tasks for the governance but didn’t include governance as the component of sustainable development.
1. TOPICALITY OF THE THEME AND NOVELTY OF THE RESEARCH
1.1. TASKS AND OBJECTIVES OF DOCTORAL THESIS
Improving understanding about formation principles of indicators and their systems, developing indicator systems adapted on national and local (municipal) level, it could be concluded that the theoretical bases of methods for formation of sustainable development indicators and their systems have not been sufficiently elaborated up till now:
1. theoretical definitions of indicators of sustainable governance and their application for elaboration of indicator and usage for measurement of governance of sustainable development,
2. conditions that must comply with information support of indicator,
8
3. the application restrictions of indicator methods in governance process,
4. integration of system formation into development planning process,
5. the place of indicator and indicator system in development planning documentation,
6. the assessment and supervision system of planning document realization in Latvia is more suitable for control of activity completion and not for assessment of strategic advancement and sustainable development and connectivity of timely warning about problems with mechanisms of decision making.
Indicators, being the main informative assessment instrument for the governance of sustainable development, have lately become increasingly important in the process of elaboration and assessment of documents. Government, and in future, municipal planning and different cross-sectional planning (coast, agglomerations, sectors, etc.) demand much better elaborated principles for formation of indicator systems, information basis for provision of it and practical recommendations for the usage of it.
Taking into account previous statements the following objective of doctoral thesis was put forward:
� to prove theoretically the selection of indicators for the governance of sustainable development and the set of prerequisites for their system structure and elaboration for the integrated governance of territorial development and practically produce and approbate the proposals for local level indicator systems, linking them hierarchically and structurally with the indicator systems of higher governance levels.
Generally it can be said that, as the result of research, theoretically based and flexibly applicable instruments had to be generated, allowing to produce and use indicators of GSD and their systems for supervision of middle and long term sustainable development planning documents for the purposes of territorial governance of different levels and functions.
To achieve the objective, the following tasks of doctoral thesis were determined:
1. to carry out theoretical assessment of indicator systems for GSD elaborated within the framework of international cooperation and local practice, to carry out document and scientific literature studies to explore their connection with the planning process; theoretically prove and formulate the set of prerequisites of required information provision for the elaboration of indicator for the governance of sustainable development;
2. to carry out integrative situation research of the territories in order to assess functional integrity of sectoral and cross-sectoral indicators and explore the possibilities of their application for indicator system
9
elaboration, to study notions of experts about the role of indicators in measuring of sustainability;
3. to evaluate theoretical bases of indicator system formation and elaborate proposal for complementary set of required prerequisites, that determines what IS content and formation process should be like, to produce the system as the result of indicator selection for profound and general characterization of governance of sustainable development;
4. to elaborate and carry out approbation research about indicator system for the application of GSD for supervision of progress of municipal planning process, based upon integrated planning principles of sustainable development;
5. to prepare proposals and methodological recommendation for the development of supervision indicator systems of development planning documents in Latvia, considering the peculiarities of planning levels and mutual interaction of levels.
The directions and objects of research were determined by the following hypothesis:
The set of complementary prerequisites allow form and develop, within integrated governance, the indicator systems for the governance of sustainable development, for the purposes of branch and territorial evaluation, which consist of informative provision of indicator, domain, integrity of indicator and horizontal and vertical integration of indicators, if:
1. the set of prerequisites of informative provision is defined for the indicator that allows determine if the selected factor and its readings can become the basis for the governance decision making in the process of evaluation, supervision and planning of territorial development;
2. the integrativity of indicator is evaluated that characterizes the relationship of separate indictors with sustainability dimensions and related areas, determining the interconnectedness of indicators;
3. indicator system is characterized by horizontal integration, ensuring the compliance with interconnectedness of sustainability dimensions and integrative problem areas, allowing adequately and complementary reflect both sustainability dimensions, its branch integrity and distribution of common and specific factors;
4. indicator system is characterized by vertical integration, allowing to form harmonic meta-system from different levels of indicators and understand its condition of governance of sustainable development, progress and contribution within the context of the whole sustainable development in all of the governance levels.
10
1.2. THE MAIN SCIENTIFIC AND PRACTICAL NOVELTIES
Scientific novelties
1. The definition of indicator of the governance of sustainable development has been significantly specified in comparison with the ones encountered in literature sources in terms of territorial governance, with the concept developed about the domain of the indicator.
2. Based on definition of the indicator, the set of proposals for indicator selection and system formation has been produced.
3. The selection of algorithms has been developed for the formation of indicator system for the governance of sustainable development, for its practical usage, based upon sustainability and integrated planning approaches.
Practical novelties
1. The fully functioning system of indicators for the governance of sustainable development has been for the first time produced and implemented in Latvia as the direct supervision instrument for the governance and strategy progress for the usage in the governance practice of the local municipality.
2. The manual of indicator system for monitoring the development and sustainability has been produced for the sustainable development strategy of Saulkrasti district with the perspective of 25 years.
3. The implementation of the principle of horizontal integration in formation of indicator system in governance practice of the local municipality.
4. The approach, based upon usage of indicator system, has been approbated for the reflection of specialized sustainability aspects and evaluation from thematic and territorial viewpoint.
5. For the first time, the complex overview of the sustainability condition of the country’s coast through usage of indicator system’s readings has been obtained.
1.3. PUBLICATIONS
Articles
Articles at indexed editions are bolded.
1. Ernšteins R., Lontone-Ieviņa A., Kauliņš J., Strazdiņš J., Šteinberga Z., Kudreņickis I., Zīlniece I., Ķepals A. Municipal climate change adaptation governance in Latvia: cross-sectoral and multi-instrumental understanding. Regional Formation and Development Studies (2014, Nr.3 (14); p40-52.
11
2. Kauliņš J., Ernšteins R., Lontone-Ieviņa A., Zvirbule L., Graudiņa-Bombiza S., Zīlniece I. Ilgtspējīgas attīstības pārvaldība Latvijas pašvaldībās: stratēģiskās plānošanas integrācijas paradigma (The new paradigm for sustainable development governance at municipalities in Latvia: integration of strategical planning). 18 p. Proceedings of 17th international scientific conference „Society and Culture: Science Through the Ages”, University of Liepāja, 2014, p.321-338.
3. Kauliņš J., Ernšteins R., Zīlniece I., Lintone-Ieviņa A., Ķepals A. Piekrastes integrētas pārvaldības pamatnostādnes: indikatori un telpiskās plānošanas prakses attīstība Latvijas pašvaldībās (ICZM Guidelines: indicators and praxis of spatial development planning at municipalities of Latvia). 17 p. Proceedings of 17th international scientific conference „Society and Culture: Science Through the Ages”, University of Liepāja, 2014, p.339-348.
4. Ernšteins R., Kauliņš J., Zīlniece I., Municipālā attīstības plānošana un vides pārvaldība Latvijā: integrētās pieejas metodoloģija un instrumentu komplementāra attīstība (Municipal development and environmental planning in Latvia: complementary development of integrated planning methodology and tools). Proceedings “Sabiedrība un kultūra XV”, University of Liepāja, Liepāja, 2014., pp. 321-338.
5. Ernšteins R., Kauliņš J., Zvirbule L., Lontone A., Ilgtspējīgas pārtikas pārvaldības attīstība vietējo pašvaldību līmenī: pamatnosacījumi un instrumenti (Basic requirements and tools for sustainable food governance at municipal level). Symposium “Sabiedrība un kultūra XV”, University of Liepāja, Liepāja, 2014., pp. 339-348.
6. Ernšteins R., Lontone A., Zvirbule L., Antons V., Zīlniece I., Kauliņš J., Vasariņa L., Climate change adaptation integration into Coastal Municipal Development: governance environment and communication preconditions. In: 12th International Multidisciplinary Scientific Geoconference SGEM 2012, Proceedings, Bulgaria, Albena, 2012, p. 1077-1084.
7. Ernšteins R., Kauliņš J., Līce E., Štāls A. (2011). Integrated coastal management for local municipalities in Latvia: sustainability governance and indicator system. WIT transaction to The Built Environment, 2011, vol.149, p.29-40.
8. Kauli ņš J., Ernšteins R., Kudreņickis I. Sustainable development indicators for integrated coastal management: definition area and spatial properties. WIT transaction to Ecology and the Environment, 2011, vol.144, p. 299-311.
9. R. Ernšteins, J.Kauliņš, I.Kudreņickis. Sustainable coastal development indicator system studies in Latvia. 3rd International Conference on Sustainable Development and Planning, Sustainable Development and Planning IV, WIT Transactions to Ecology and the Environment, Vol 120, WIT Press, 2009. pp. 653-664.
12
10. Ernšteins R, Kudrenickis I., Kaulins J. Sustainable Coastal Development Indicator Systems: Strategy and Practice in Latvia. Proceedings of the International Conference „Current Issues in Management of Business and Society Development”, May 2009, University of Latvia, Faculty of Economics and Management, Riga, Latvia, 2010.
11. Kauliņš J., Vietējā līmeņa reģionālās plānošanas prakse Latvijā un piekrastes problemātika (Local level regional planning praxis in Latvia and coastal issues). Proceedings „Piekrastes ilgtspējīga attīstība: sadarbības pārvaldība”. UL, Academical Publisher, Riga, 2008, pp. 71.-80.
12. Kauliņš J., Iespējas Latvijas piekrastes ilgtspējības novērtēšanai ar indikatoru metodi (Possibilities for assessment of coastal sustainability in Latvia, using indicator method). Symposium. „Piekrastes ilgtspējīga attīstība: sadarbības pārvaldība”. UL, Academical Publisher, Riga, 2008, pp. 127.-137.
13. Kudreņickis I., Ernšteins R., Kauliņš J., Kadikis R., Environmental Information and Systems for Sustainable Coastal Development in Latvia. Proceedings: International workshop, Geographic Information Facilities Supporting Access to Environmental Information, Turku University, dpt. of Geography and Geology, Turku, Finland, 2006. pp. 18-27.
Published message thesis
1. Ernšteins R., Kauliņš J., Lontone A. Integrēta plānošana un piekrastes problemātika Salacgrīvas novadā: ilgtspējīgas attīstības ilgtermiņa stratēģijas izstrāde (Integrated planning and coastal issues at Salacgrīva district: elaboration of long-term strategy of sustainable development). 72nd scientific conference, LU, 2014., Geography, Geology and Environmental science. Proceedings. Riga, 2014, pp.393-397.
2. Kauliņš J. Indikatoru atlase un sistēmas veidošana teritorijas ilgtspējīgas attīstības pārvaldībai (Indicator selection and creation of systems to manage sustainable development at spatial areas). 72nd scientific conference, LU, 2014., Geography, Geology and Environmental science. Proceedings. Riga, 2014, pp.402-405.
3. Kauliņš J. Ilgtspējīgas attīstības pārvaldības indikatoru sistēmas: pašvaldību integrēta pārvaldība praksē (Indicator systems for sustainable development governance: integrated municipal governance in praxis). 72nd scientific conference, LU, 2013., Geography, Geology and Environmental science. Proceedings. Riga, 2013, pp.439-441.
4. Raimonds Ernšteins, Ivars Kudreņickis, Andris Viesturs Urtāns, Valdis Antons, Sintija Kušinska, Jānis Kauliņš Piekrastes pašvaldības stratēģija klimata pārmaiņu adaptācijai Latvijā: interdisciplinārais audits un rīcības vadlīnijas (Interdisciplinary audition and action guidelines for coastal climate change adaptation municipal strategy). International conference „Environmental science and education in Latvia and Europe”, proceedings
5. Ernšteins R., Kudreņickis I., Kauliņš J., Integrētā vides pārvaldība: piekrastes ilgtspējīga attīstība (Integrated environmental management: sustainable development at coastal zone). International conference „Environmental science and education in Latvia and Europe”, proceedings, RTU publisher, Riga, 2007, pp.58-60.
13
Other publications
1. Lagzdiņa Ē., Kauliņš J. Integrated coastal management. Symposium „Vides komunikācija un vides politikas integrācija”. Riga: REC Latvija, 2010. – 136 p., pp. 114.-128.
2. Marti X., Lescrauvaet A.-K. et al., incl. Kaulins J. Indicators guideline: to adopt and indicator-based approach to evaluate coastal sustainable development. Barcelona, EU DEDUCE consortium, 2007 – 98p.
3. Kauliņš J., Vesperis V., Dombrovskis V. (2012) Latvijas ilgtspējīgas attīstības stratēģijas līdz 2030.gadam īstenošanas uzraudzības ziņojums (Supervision message for strategy „Latvia-2030”). Cross-sectoral co-ordination center. Riga, 2012, 127 p.
4. Kauliņš J. Saulkrastu novada ilgtspējīgas attīstības stratēģija 25 gadu perspektīvā. Stratēģijas pamatelementi un dokumentu analīze (Strategy for 25 year sustainable development perspective at Saulkrasti district. Basic elements and analysis of sources). KBLC Ltd., 2013., 90 p.
5. Kauliņš J. Saulkrastu novada ilgtspējīgas attīstības stratēģija 25 gadu perspektīvā. Attīstības un ilgtspējības monitoringa indikatoru sistēmas lietošanas rokasgrāmata (Strategy for 25 year sustainable development perspective at Saulkrasti district. Indicator system manual). KBLC Ltd., 2013., 160 p.
6. Kauliņš J. Latvijas attīstības plānošanas dokumentu indikatoru rokasgrāmata (Manual for indicators of state-level planning documents in Latvia). Cross-sectoral co-ordination center, 2013. 190 p.
7. Kauliņš J. Par grozījumiem Latvijas ilgtspējīgas attīstības stratēģijas līdz 2030.gadam indikatoru sistēmā (On amendments to the indicator system for the Latvian Sustainable Development Strategy to 2030). Cross-sectoral coordination center., 2013. 15 p.
Most important messages at international conferences (does not mentioned if it is the same name published abstracts or article)
1. Kaulins J., Ernsteins R., Integration principle for coastal municipal strategic development planning: sustainability indicator system design and implementation. 6th International Conference on Sustainable Development and Planning. 27 – 29 May 2013, Kos, Greece.
2. Kauliņš J., Piekrastes ilgtspējīgas attīstības indikatori Latvijas vietējās pašvaldībās: diferencētas sistēmas nepieciešamība un iespējas (Sustainable coastal development indicators at municipalities of Latvia: the need and opportunities for a differentiated system). 9th International scientific conference „Man and Environment”, 2009.05., Liepāja
3. Kauliņš J., Kudreņickis J., Ernšteins R. Sustainable costal development indicators for local municipalities: Saulkrasti case. International conference „New Socio-economic Challenges of Development in Europe – 2010, Rīga, Oct. 7-9th. Awarded as the conference best poster message.
4. Ernšteins R., Kauliņš J., Kudreņickis I., Antons V. Integrated coastal management model approach for local municipalities in Latvia. International
14
conference „New Socio-economic Challenges of Development in Europe – 2010, Rīga, Oct. 7-9th.*
5. Kauliņš J. Piekrastes ilgtspējīgas attīstības indikatori pašvaldības plānošanā – labas prakses piemēri (Good praxis examples for coastal sustainable development municipal indicators). 10th International scientific conference „Man and Environment”, Liepāja, 2010.05. 21, 22.
6. Kauliņš J., Ernšteins R., Kudreņickis I. Piekrastes ilgtspējīgas attīstības indikatori vietējās pašvaldībās: nepieciešamība un iespējas (Indocators of coastal sustainable development at local governance: the need and opportunities). 68th scientific conference, UL, 2010.
7. Kauliņš J., Introduction in Indicator System for Measuring of Coastal Sustainability in Latvia. 66th scientific conference, UL, 2008.
2. OVERVIEW OF DOCTORAL THESIS The doctoral thesis is composed of six main parts that deal with the tasks and
stages of research completion:
1. Research methodology and procedure of completion,
2. The integrated planning fro the governance of sustainable development,
3. The formulation of indicator for the governance of sustainable development,
4. The functional classification of indicators and integrative properties,
5. Indicator systems and their integration into development planning process,
6. Indicator systems in government planning documents.
The first chapter deals with the research methods that were used for the acquisition of the results of the work, as well as the basic stages of research which, in chronological order reveal the procedure of the research and the main conclusions obtained in each of these stages.
The second chapter describes the integrated planning of the governance of sustainable development, its main models and development in Latvia, the ways of how assessment and supervision mechanisms are formed and integrated into development planning documents.
The third chapter describes the properties of separate indicator, with the research reflection of it that leads to the improvements of indicator definition, set of prerequisites for the informative provision of the indicator and its domain.
The fourth chapter focuses on integrity of indicator- the property of indicator that connects them with each other and with sustainability dimensions and research is about what is necessary to be able to form the system-structured, complementary set of indicators.
The fifth chapter provides insight into development of concepts of vertical and horizontal integration of municipal indicator systems, as well as researches about the
15
properties of indicators and their systems in such specific cases as branch and coastal governance.
The sixth chapter reveals the role of indicators in government planning documents in Latvia, the assessment of currently used indicator systems and sustainable development of the country has been provided with proposals of their improvement.
2.1. RESEARCH METHODS APPLIED
The following main groups of research methods were used:
� Case study research, which implies acquisition of thematically coordinated information during the field studies using the analysis of socio-economic and natural environment data, document studies, interviews with target group representatives, interviews and inquiries of focus groups.
� Deep interviews with experts and specialists;
� Document studies;
� Approbation research;
� Spatial analysis of territory, using GIS instruments and methods.
The overall methodological scheme of the doctoral thesis is shown in figure 1 at next page.
Case study research is a complex method that contains the examination of particular case from different aspects and acquiring information from different sources (Yin, 1994). The main principles of usage of the case study research are the simultaneousness of research activities with respect to process to be researched and the synergic complimentarity of qualitative and quantitative methods for the information acquisition that helps to avoid erroneous conclusions, using these methods separately or even ignoring one or another group (Brannen, 2005).
The case study research was mainly applied in five research works carried out within the framework of planning works of municipal territorial development (districts (of Aglona, Beverīna, Cesvaine, Salacgrīva and Saulkrasti).
The research begins with complex analysis of natural environment and socio-economic data that allowed to obtain initial overview of different types of resources of the territory and formed the informational basis for the further procedure of the research. Likewise, information sources and types were also explored that would be possible to use later on in application of indicator system for GSD.
Interviews with the representatives of target groups. The most significant information was obtained during seven interviews from the following respondents in the districts of Aglona, Beverīna, Cesvaine, Salacgrīva and Saulkrasti. The interviews included information about the aspects of integrated planning and indicator usage in elaboration of municipal development planning documents.
16
Example of IS;
standard
indicator forms
(DEDUCE)
Calculations
Assessment of
coastal
sustainability in
Latvia
Adaptation for
Latvia
Adapted
indicator
system
Problems with
selection of
new indicators
Assessing of
indicator
definitions
Assessing of
selection rules
Requirements
for information
support
Integrativity of
the indicator
Definitions
formation
conditions
The definition
Place of the
indicator in
system
Integrative
planning
method
GID indicator
system
SustainabilityLegislative
requirements
Case study
research
Document
studies
Document
studies,
interviews
Horizontal
integration
Vertical
integration
IS in state-level
planning
documents
Assessment;
handbook
Supervizing
reports
Latvija-2030
NAP 2014-
2020
Studies of
analogs;
interviews
Municipal
GID IS
Thematical
GID IS
GIS
tools
Case study
research
Applicable
outcomes
Academical
outcomes
Research base
points
Research
methods used
Case study
research
Milestones
GIS
tools
Documentation
for municipal
GID IS
Studies of
analogs
Fig.1 Overall methodological scheme of research
Focus group interviews were carried out during research works of the territory while completing the audit of sustainability dimensions, identifying integrated territorial problem areas and setting priorities. 24 focus group interviews took place in five research territories, with 3 to 18 respondents taking part in each of them; typical number of respondents into group of interviewees was 7-8.
17
Inquiries were made with several goals:
� To obtain the resident’s opinion about social, economic, environmental and governance situation and its problems in the territory of research, as an additional information to the one obtained during focus group interviews,
� To obtain resident’s opinion about the development possibilities of the territory to be researched,
� To obtain information that is necessary for calculations of several indicators,
� To obtain information about relationships of residents with definite parts of their administrative territorial units and other territorial units.
5 inquiries took place in four research territories with 534 respondents taking part at them. Within the context of doctoral thesis, the most significant information was obtained from questions related to governance and environmental condition and which were displayed in the district of Saulkrasti in the indicator system for the governance of sustainable development. The inquiries made in Liepupe and Saulkrasti were useful for theoretical conclusions which, along the concepts of physical and economical geography, help define the coastal areas as the socially-geographic phenomenon, but systematic accumulation of these concepts is the basis for the implementation of progress indicator for integrated coastal governance.
The goal of document studies was to point out the aspects of development planning and assessment within the legal framework, including the principles of sustainability and integration, to obtain information about vertical (with higher levels of planning) and horizontal integration (among neighboring territories and mutually internal problems). Within the framework of development planning, the document studies were carried out according to unified scheme; international and national legislative acts related to the topic of research and planning documents, the policy planning documents of governmental sectors, the development planning documents of regional and local significance, as well as sectoral planning documents, not directly associated with administrative territories related to particular part of certain territory of the country.
One of the consistent methods used was deep interviews with experts and specialists. The goal of these interviews was to obtain information about notions, opinions and attitudes of respondents towards usage of indicators for the governance of sustainable development and their systems not only in specific territory or planning document but also how indicators for GSD and their systems are incorporated into planning process and legislation and what kind of usage perspectives this instrument would have. In total, nine deep interviews took place during the research. The most significant conclusions arising from these interviews are associated with requirements for horizontal and vertical (inter-level) integration of indicator systems, in a sense that the autonomous indicator system will benefit a lot if the results are compared with
18
similar territories. The specialists from public authorities also expressed their opinion about implementation perspectives of IS GSD, emphasizing the complexity of process and costs, but on the whole there was unanimous opinion that only IS GSD in future could become the informative basis of supervision and assessment systems of long and middle term planning documents of territorial cross-section, as it is now government level planning documents. Several conclusions were also obtained in relation to integrated coastal management and its planning.
Three types of approbations can be distinguished among the methods: in seminars of practical research, in planning process and final approbation.
The intermediate results of different sub-systems and different levels of the readiness of research have been presented and, consequently, discussed in many practical research seminars and discussions taking place within the framework of scientific and practical conferences. Great part of these events had taken place in relation to international research projects where the author had participated in a capacity of expert of indicators of the governance of sustainable development. These were the following research projects:
� EU Interreg IV project „Baltic environment, food and health: from habits to awareness” (FOODWEB), 2010.-2013.,
� EU CORDIS The 7th framework project „Innovative technologies for safer European coasts in a changing climate” (THESEUS), 2009.-2013.,
� EEA grant financed Project „Environmental communication instruments for environmental policy integration” financed by EEA grant, within the framework of the program “Environment policy integration in Latvia” 2009.-2010.,
� EU Baltic region project „Climate Change: Impacts, Costs and Adaptation in the Baltic Sea Region” (BaltCICA). 2007.-2013.
� EU Interreg III projekct „Développement durable des Côtes Européennes” (DEDUCE), 2005.-2007.
Several dozens of seminars had been organized within the framework of these projects where around 20 presentations from author had taken place with resulting discussions also about indicator systems for the governance of sustainable development, their formation and usage. The assessment of sustainable coastal development, the first of its kind in Latvia, is associated with the results of DEDUCE project, which is based on indicator usage.
The expert interviews have contributed a lot to the issues of the elaboration and application of indicator definition, as well as discussions within framework of regular scientific conferences at the University of Latvia and University of Liepāja. The principles, upon which practically applicable definition of indicator for the governance of sustainable development had been approbated right there, the concept about
19
application boundaries of indicator method within the context of governance had been specified together with set of prerequisites for indicator information provision.
The completion of practical development planning works were of great significance both in polishing of the method of integrated sustainable planning and in acquisition of important conclusions with relation to understanding about the place of indicators and their systems into a planning process. If indicators up till now were considered as part of process assessment and supervision of development plan, then these approbations provided insight that indicators (even not calculated) has great importance in all the planning circle, starting from studies and elaboration of policy principles because these give points of reference for provision and understanding of integrity of the planning document.
The doctoral thesis includes the results from research works and approbations carried out within the framework of the following planning projects:
� Development of strategy and sustainable development programs for the districts of Aglona, Beverīna, Cesvaine and Saulkrasti,
� Development of environmental reviews within planning documents for the procedure of EIA in the town of Gulbene and district of Saulkrasti,
� Development of sustainable development strategy for the district of Aloja and Salacgrīva.
The final approbation took place in the district of Saulkrasti, where indicators were used both for information acquisition and structuring in the planning process and as a part of supervision of sustainable development strategy. Indicator system for GSD in the district of Saulkrasti was implemented in three phases. First of all, the indicator list was specified and elaborated based on the results of research carried out during the planning process. After that, the manual of indicator system was produced, consisting of system’s description, instructions for the result reflection, all indicator statements, detailed data acquisition and calculation methodologies and samples of how to demand information form the institutions. The training of the personnel of the municipality also took place within the process of implementation.
Document studies were also consistent research method besides the framework of case study research. These were mainly associated with the evaluation of legislative acts: the ways the development planning legislation is constructed and how the requirements for integrated sustainable planning are incorporated there and what kind of regulation is planned for the process of supervision and assessment. The number of different of planning documents was analyzed apart from case study research. The main idea here was to examine how the aspects and instruments of sustainability, integrity and assessment are incorporated into legislative acts and planning documents that were not directly linked with research territories and what kind of conclusions can be achieved to make the elaboration of these principles into planning documents realistic and efficient.
20
The spatial analysis methods within the framework of research can be seen as the usage of GIS instruments for indicator calculations and visualization, as well as for determination of distribution of other factors influencing the development and for the determination of this statistical distribution. The spatial analyses had the following functions:
� the research of spatial distribution of different factors in coastal areas and adjacent territories,
� spatial distribution research of the factors influencing territorial development and environment in the territory of municipality,
� the illustrative instrument, depicting on the map indicator measurement results and spatial development perspectives of the territory.
The coastal information classification according to geospatial features was elaborated within DEDUCE project (Marti et al., 2007), that was later supplemented according to specifics of Latvian coastal areas.
2.2. PROCEDURE OF THE RESERACH
The procedure of the research can be relatively divided into four functionally different and subsequent stages.
1. The problem identification and formulation, the definition of indicator (2007.-2009.).
2. The development of indicator selection methodology bases (2009.-2011.).
3. The multi-sectoral and sectoral integration of indicator application. Development of integrative methodology of territorial development planning (2011.-2013.).
4. The horizontal and vertical integration of indicator systems into/among different governance levels (2012.-2014.).
2.2.1. Integrated planning of sustainable development governance
Integrated planning method has been developed based upon 4P planning model and two mutually complementary research groups: studies of legislation and planning documents and research works carried out in municipal development planning process. The planning experts in local level have been well informed about possible advantages of the planning method while in planning regions there was certain lack of understanding about applied integrated planning method, particularly in Vidzeme planning region. In fact, regional experts lack this kind of experience in evaluation of such documents. The main cause of it was mainly the lack of suitable methodological materials.
21
In comparison with previous integrated planning models (Local Agenda 21, 4P), the integrated planning model has acquired following supplements:
1. Evaluation of interconnectedness in levels of goals, priorities and courses of action,
2. The usage of information, characteristic to indicators, in all of the stages of planning and the indicator linking not only with planning results but also with information evaluation acquired during the planning process,
3. Informative support of supervision and assessment mechanism by the information basis provided by indicator system for GSD,
4. Usage of communication function of indicators in the planning process.
The above mentioned improvements are the basis for the further development of integrated planning methodology on the municipal, regional and national level.
The method is approbated in the planning process and with the related seminars in the districts of Aglona, Aloja, Beverīna, Cesvaine, Salacgrīva and Saulkrasti. It is based on acquired information about territorial resources and needs using case study research. This approach allows understand the connection of the basic elements of the strategy, i.e., goals, priorities and courses of action, with sustainable development and among themselves, consisting of the following main steps: sector audit, integrative problem area audit, the formulation of the main elements of the strategy, the elaboration of spatial development strategy, formulation of course of action, the elaboration of proposals for investment and course of action plan and the elaboration of supervision system planning document. The last stage also includes the elaboration of proposal for indicator system of GSD.
2.2.2. Defining of sustainable development indicator
The definition of indicator for the governance of sustainable development in terms of territorial governance was significantly specified, in comparison with the ones available in literature, and the concept about domain of the indicator was elaborated.
First of all, the set of prerequisites was elaborated, that would have to be taken into account for the definition of sustainable development indicator, including governance function into it. Viewing it systemically, the definition of the indicator has to respond to the following criteria:
� What values can be indicators,
� What these values reflect,
� What are their place into governance system,
� What are the restrictions of indicator applicability,
� What sort of indicator features are different from other measurable values,
� What is the significance of measurable parameter for the given governance system.
22
The definition of indicator of governance of sustainable development
Parameter or commonly interpretable group of parameters can be defined as indicator of the governance of sustainable development if it/they are considered as subsequent and mutually comparable numerical values and which reflect the goals of governance, sustainable values and the change of these values in course of time and which:
� allow to judge about system to be governed and the condition and tendencies of its components, including comparison among system’s parts and /or in comparison with other, similar systems,
� are directly or indirectly affected by administration decisions in respective level of governance,
� provide principal information for the needs of the governance decision making process,
� are approved by appropriate governance decision.
The definition area of the governance indicator characterizes the relations of the parameter selected for the measurement with the governance level.
1. The parameter or group of parameters to be reviewed can be used as the indicator for the governance of sustainable development if it illustrates the accomplishment and progress towards objectives prescribed in planning documents of territorial governance and the completion and control of which are included in respective competence framework of governance level.
2. The parameter or group of parameters in question can not be the indicator for the governance of sustainable development if they refer to the indications which are unambiguously affected by the decisions made on the lower governance level.
3. The parameter or group of parameters to be reviewed can not be the sustainable development indicator of the territory if the changes produced by certain level competence decisions are insignificant in comparison with external factor, including the changes resulting from higher level competence decisions.
Based upon definition and domain of the indicator, the set of prerequisites has been elaborated for informative provision of indicator that serves for the indicator selection and system’s formation from the selected group of parameters:
1. the calculated result must be expressed with orderly row of numerical value,
2. measurement row must be carried out in sufficiently long period of time to observe the tendencies;
3. the resolution capacity in time and space must be defined for the indicator,
23
4. indicator must be comparable to itself in different moments of time or with analogue indictor in other territories. It means that measurements ( data contents, their acquisition and subsequent calculation) in different moments of time and different part s of territory must be carried out methodologically unanimous or, at least safely comparable technique;
5. indicator must characterize unambiguously the given phenomenon as much as possible, not allowing significantly different treatment of observations;
6. data must be obtainable on reasonable grounds (costs, permits, etc.) and sufficiently reliable;
7. the results of calculations must be well illustrated.
The place of indicator for GSD in the model of integrated planning is explained in figure 2.
Fig.2 The place of indicator for GSD in the
model of integrated planning
2.2.3. Integrative properties of indicators
While the concept of sustainability is being improved and having acquired, first of all, environmental, economic and social dimensions and later on supplemented by governance and communication environment, the indicators were divided into 4 groups
24
– environmental, economic, social and governance/communication indicators. This classification has so far been mentioned in only one monograph that is entirely devoted to the issues of measurement of sustainable development (Bell, Morse, 2008). Still, the monograph doesn’t discuss the appropriate sustainability dimension, although such approach had already been highlighted in literature in 2007 (George, 2007 Ernšteins et al., 2009). Along the structural components in view of sustainability, the mutual relation models of factors characterizing sustainable development are very important. Currently, more often, the so called, DPSIR model is used, which can be seen as further development stage of previously mentioned models. The basis of the model is formed by driving forces, pressures, status, impacts and responses. This model describes dynamic situation, paying attention to different existing feedbacks within the system. Indicators by their nature, provide as if snapshot for constantly changing system, while assessments accompanying indicators, can also display dynamic relationships (Gabrielson, Bosch, 2003).
Reviewing completely different problematic situations in relation towards sustainability dimensions, it can be seen, that there are three different types of problem areas and correspondingly, indicators can be divided into 3 groups according to these types:
� sub-sectoral indicators – describe certain course of action, related to certain sector within one sustainability dimension,
� sectoral (or one-dimension) indicators – describe course of action or its group, related to the whole sustainability dimension,
� integrative indicators – describe courses of action related to integrative problem areas, i.e., are referred to at least two sustainability dimensions.
Examining all the system on the whole, the fourth group can also be identified:
� integral also strategic indicators – describe the main and the general indicators of the governed system that characterizes the given governance system on the whole and/or in comparison with similar systems.
Summarizing this classification, the concept of integrity of indicator was introduced, i.e., how extensively in relation towards sustainability dimensions, the specific indicator characterizes the given governance system. The above mentioned classification resembles in a great extent to (EU SD Strategy, 2005), however, indicators in this source are grouped according to the principle of pyramid of target audience levels (Shields et al., 2002) and these do not reflect the presence of fourth dimension of sustainability, i.e., governance and communication environment.
2.2.4. Indicator systems and their integration into development planning process
The studies of great number of different indicator systems reveal that, irrespective of the type of indicator system, they all have in common structured and hierarchical design. Indicators are divided into thematic groups within the system that
25
are formed according to sustainable dimensions or of prior integrative problem area principle. These groups include subgroups which, in turn, are formed according to the branch or course of action principle. Indicators that are subgroups may consist of one or several measurable parameters, but for determination of each parameter one or several value measurements might be necessary.
The indicator selecti-on is associated with selecti-on of definite characteristic value of the branch or course of action. It is done, first of all, according to specific algorithm, examining the relationship of these values with sustainability, develop-ment and governance and afterwards checking the conformity of the selected values to the informative provision of chosen prerequisites. The selection of potential indicators for possible strategic goals, prior integrative problem areas and the characteristic parameters of integrated planning process related to long term courses of action are shown in figure 3. During this selection pro-cess, the verification is done
to clarify if the indicator meets the requirements of indicator for the governance of sustainable development, i.e., if there is a connection with the main aspects of sustainability, development and governance, as well as assessment of integrity of the indicator. Finally, the proposed indicators are arranged, singling out leading and strategical (integral) indicators.
The verification of the selected potential indicators to comply with the set of prerequisites for informative provision of indicator and domain of governance indicator is represented in figure 4. During the selection process the significance of those parameters that formally are not included in domain of indicator for GSD is also assessed, which can be for some reason sufficiently significant in governance decision making. Finally, horizontally integrated indicator system for GSD is established and approved.
Fig. 3 Selection of indicators at planning process
26
The vertical integration prin-ciple means the relationship of indicator system with IS which is effective in other governance levels and it is necessary for mutual comparability of different territories, as well as for the clarification com-mon tendencies. Three-level vertical integration must be observed in municipal model: at least part of the main parameters, related to the strategic goals, must be associated with government indicators and on the whole, with non-existent regional level indicators.
Territory is characterized not only administrative-territorial divisi-on, but also areas of special signi-ficance, which can be indirectly associated with administrative divi-sion. Strategy „Latvia-2030” prescri-bes several of such territories that are areas of national interest.
The indicator system for the measurement coastal sustainability differs from the general system with its spatial character: coast is formed by coastline with related set of other geospatial elements (Clark, 1997). Therefore, the indicator system, by the help of which, the coastal sustainability is assessed, must at least be capable of distinguishing the coast from the hinterland and compare them among themselves,
clarifying the origin of impacts that determine the condition of coast and development tendencies and provide insight about how coastal impacts are distributed along the governance territory.
Following the character of spatial distribution of data, four main types of defining coastal areas can be distinguished (Marti X. et al, 2007): administrative-territorial, coordination character, geometric buffer and combined one that contains features of locus and administrative territorial ones. It is worthwhile to distinguish the
Fig.4 Selection of indicators by the set of prerequisites for informative provision of
indicator.
27
fifth type as well-according to planning elements in Latvian circumstances. The character of data determines not only types of coastal definition, but also the spatial relationships of indicators with the coast: special coastal indicators, decisive coastal indicators, characterizing elements not specific to the coast, but where it is possible, spatially correctly evaluate coastal related impacts and relatively decisive coastal indicators, where the spatial distribution of data is “unclear”, not allowing to estimate these impacts correctly, but our common knowledge about territory allow evaluate them in qualitative way.
The indicator method of DEDUCE project was used for evaluating the sustainable development of the European coast and this type of work was also completed for the coast of Latvia.
2.2.5. Indicator systems in state-level planning documents
The supervision report of realization of for the Strategy of Sustainable Development of Latvia up till 2030 was elaborated in 2012. It was based upon the indicator system for the governance of sustainable development prescribed in strategy. The list of indicators is composed of 7 strategic indicators and 49 indicators that are divided into 7 priority groups of Strategy. During the final stage of report elaboration, the indicator conformity assessment was prepared that allowed identify indicators after established criteria which had problems of informative provision. Following this assessment and Governmental Statistics Program for 2014, the recommendations for improvement of indicator system were prepared. These recommendations propose to supplement the list of indicators with nine new indicators. While the existing indicators evaluating them according to preconditions that were put forward for indicator information provision, it could be concluded that three indicators must be excluded as inadequate for these preconditions.
The strategy “Latvia-2030” and indicator manual of NDP can be mentioned as practical output which contains precise descriptions of data acquisition and illustration in order to ensure the comparability of results, irrespective of person in charge of preparation the review.
28
3. THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS, RESULTS AND PROPOSALS
3.1. THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS ABOUT INDICATORS AND THEIR SYST EMS
FOR THE GOVERNANCE OF SUATAINABLE DEVELOPEMNT
In order to ensure the process of sustainable development governance (planning, supervision and evaluation) several basic principles must be observed, which characterize the development process of indicator systems and separate indicators within the structure of these systems. Carrying out the research of existing indicators, indicator systems and their relationships with research of planning process, the set of preconditions was defined for the development of indicators for GSD and their systems.
1. The indicator informative provision and domain, the integrativity of indicator and horizontal and vertical integration of the indicator system form the complementary set of prerequisites of indicators fort GSD and their system development that allow to make the indicator system for the needs of specific territories and branches.
2. Informative support of indicator – conditions at which the selected factor from the feasible factor group becomes the functioning indicator, the readings of which for particular indicators and their systems on the whole are the basis for the governance decision making in the process of territorial development planning and supervision.
3. The interconnectedness of indicators is determined by indicator integrativity , which characterizes the relationships of certain indicators with sustainability dimensions and their interaction areas that allow formation of balanced indicator systems for sustainable development planning, supervision and assessment.
4. The horizontal integration of indicator systems is ensured by compliance with interconnectedness of integrated problem areas and sustainability dimensions allowing to establish indicator system for GSD which adequately and complementary reflects both sustainability dimension, its branch integrity and distribution of common and specific factors.
5. Vertical integration of indicator systems allow to form harmonic meta-system from different levels of indicators and understand the condition of governance of sustainable development of its separate parts, progress and contribution within the context of the whole sustainable development in all of the governance levels.
3.2. OTHER SCIENTIFIC RESULTS
1. The definition of the indicator for GSD has been improved, on the basis of which the concept about indicator’s domain has been elaborated and the set of prerequisites established for informative provision of the indicator.
29
2. The selection algorithms have been established for the formation of the indicator system for governance of sustainable development, for their practical usage, base upon indicator’s definition and approaches of sustainability and integrated planning.
3. 4P integrated planning model has been improved, considering the importance of planning integrity and indicators for GSD within the components of the entire planning model.
3.3. PRACTICAL RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH
1. The fully functioning system of indicators for the governance of sustainable development has been for the first time produced and implemented in Latvia as the direct supervision instrument for the governance and strategy progress for the usage in the governance practice of the local municipality.
� The indicator system for the assessment and supervision of realization of sustainable development strategy for the district of Saulkrasti has been elaborated based upon theoretical conclusions arising from the research about integrated development planning and the significance and position of indicators for GSD in it. Indicator system for GSD is incorporated into sustainable development strategy as the informative basis of supervision and assessment mechanism and which is formed by the following documents:
� Structured list of indicators, grouping them into sustainability dimensions and integrative problem areas (in total 67 indicators; see the chapter on environmental indicators at table on p.30),
� During the system’s implementation the training of the municipality’s personnel was organized about practical usage of indicator system.
� The indicator system is approved for the usage by the resolution of administration, being as a part of the sustainable development strategy of the district.
� In 2014, the first full-scale assessment of the governance of sustainable development took place which will end approximately in may, 2015, and the results will be included into public report of activities of the district municipality for the year of 2014.
2. The manual of usage of indicator system and indicators for sustainable governance monitoring was produced with “Perspective of 25 years of sustainable development strategy of the district of Saulkrasti” where methodological recommendations for the usage of indicator systems and each of individual indicator, instruction about result processing and representation for the needs of decision makers and other public target groups are provided.
30
TABLE 1. Indicator system for assessment of sustainable development governance at Saulkrasti district
and their coastal zone (environmental indicators only).
Group of indicators No. Indicator Tha main units Period Data source Calculated by Comparison
I. Natural environment, D
D1. Status of the „Green web”
1. D1.1. Forest area dynamics hectares per year, ratio, %
Annual State Forest Service Dev.plan. division None
2. D1.2. Wood-cutten permissions out of wood permissions per year Annual Municipal service Dev.plan. division Internal
3. D1.3. Financing for green area maintenance Eur per year, eur/1000m2 Annual Municipal budget Dev.plan. division None
D2. Real and potential loads on environment by public utilities
4. D2.1. Collected ammount of waste cu.metres per year Annual Waste managers Dev.plan. division None
5. D2.2. Satisfaction of population by waste management opinions, % 2 years Questionnaire Dev.plan. division None
6. D2.3. Household provision of centralized water supply and sewerage
household %, part of territory, %
2 years „Saulkrastu Komunālserviss”
Dev.plan. division Internal
7. D2.4. Sewage treatment plant emissions to water main pollutant groups, % tons per year
Annual Saulkrastu Komunālserviss”
Dev.plan. division Internal
8. D2.5. Financial resources for the development of public utility
thsd. eur, % of budget
Annual Municipal budget Dev.plan. division None
D3. Air quality and impact on climate changes
9. D3.1. Fuel uses by type municipal and industrial sector tons per year, % of overall
Annual Environmental data center (EDC)
Dev.plan. division Internal
10. D3.2. Greenhouse gas emissions from municipal and industrial sector
tons per year Annual EDC Dev.plan. division None
11. Excluded because without long-term field studies (at least 2-3 winter season) it is impossible to develop a proper methodology
12. D3.4. Air quality by lichenoindication index Annual Volunteers Dev.plan. division Internal
D4. Surface water quality, coastal zone
13. D4.1. Swimming water quality in the sea excess, % of measurem. Annual Health Inspection Dev.plan. division None
14. D4.2. River water quality by bioindication index Annual Volunteers Dev.plan. division Internal (rivers)
D5. Land use for development
15. D5.1. Building permissions and their types number by types Annual Municipal service Municipal service Internal
16. D5.2. Natural base land transformation hectares per year, % woodlands, agr.lands.
Annual Real Estate Division Real Estate Division
None
D6. Natural risks 17. D6.1. Number of stormy days number per year Annual EDC Dev.plan. division None
18. D6.2. Coastal erosion metres per year Annual Volunteers Dev.plan. division Internal
D7. Common indications
19. D7.1. Population opinion on the state of the environment opinions % change of opinions, %
2 years Questionnaire Dev.plan. division Nnone
31
3. The realization of horizontal integration principle in formation of indicator system in governance practice of local municipality. This indicator system has been elaborated for the district of Salacgrīva in the course of planning of sustainable development strategy. System is characterized by deep horizontal integrity as it was evaluated among problem areas and sustainable development trends, consequently transferring this relationship to the indicators, which describe particular areas.
4. Based upon usage of indicator system, the approach of assessment and reflection of specialized sustainability aspects was approbated from thematic and territorial viewpoint.
From thematic viewpoint, it has resulted in elaboration of indicator system for:
� Climate change adaptation strategy in the district of Salacgrīva,
� description of specific sector of economics: “Guidelines for the governance of healthy and environmental-friendly life cycle of food” in the district of Salacgrīva.
From territorial viewpoint, the proposals have been elaborated for indicator systems focusing on:
� evaluation of sustainability of Latvian coast, by adapting DEDUCE indicator system to the circumstances of Latvia;
� evaluation of coastal and communication risks in the district of Saulkrasti.
5. For the first time, the complex overview was produced about condition of coastal sustainability of the country, using readings from indicator system.
The summary of the assessment of coastal sustainability of Latvia in accordance with the data obtained from DEDUCE project is following:
� The difference between Latvian coast and hinterland, on the whole, are insignificant, only certain indicators show significant peculiarities;
� Development activities are concentrated in restricted areas, mainly associated with the influence areas of large cities. The rest of the territory is scarcely inhabited, with poor infrastructure and development of economic activities;
� Conservation currently prevails upon the development therefore it cannot be asserted that Latvian coast is characterized by sustainable development. Here the essential difference from the initial assumption of the project is seen and the actual situation in majority of project member states with respect to the coast as the place of problem concentration, which is associated intensive use of coastal areas with excess of anthropogenic pressures and demands immediate and complex coastal protection;
32
� Coastal areas have considerable potential for development of economic activities and welfare, even considering the necessary requirements of sustainability principle and the related restrictions of usage of ecosystem services.
The peculiarity of the Latvian coast is the existence of two types of extremely different coastal zones: urban and rural/ small town type territories. Problematic is the situation in Riga: agglomeration bordering with the sea, but the main activities are slightly removed inland; the impacts on the sea take place through the River Daugava and the port, as well as in the summer season through the migration of residents in search of coastal services in the direction of Jūrmala.
6. Better suitability of the usage of GSD IS principle for the supervision and assessment of strategic planning documents in comparison with the system of productive indicators has been proved.
7. The productive indicator system as it defined within assessment principle of APSL, is closely related to specific activities and their performance, therefore it is better suited for supervision of short term and to some extent for middle term planning documents.
8. Indicator system for GSD in comparison with productive indicator system reflects:
- Progression towards strategic goals, on the level of their priorities (productive indicators can reflect it but it’s not compulsory),
- Elements of sustainability and governance,
- Interconnectedness of the planning elements,
- At least part of system’s components must ensure the comparison with similar or competitive areas.
9. In contrast with productive indicators which are devised only for assessment of planning results, the usage of indicators for GSD is important in all of the phases of development planning.
3.4. PROPOSALS
1. Further trends of research
� Further research of vertical integration, specifying the proportions of integrated components into indicator systems for GSD of different governance levels. The approbation of vertical integration on the levels of Municipal and regional IS.
� The exploration of generalization possibilities of coastal indicator systems for GSD, by referring formation principles of coastal IS to other bordering territories: borderland, proximity of large cities, geographical obstacles, etc.
33
� The studies of practical activities of elaborated IS GSD (Saulkrasti, Salacgrīva); the results of assessment of sustainable development in specific territories and further research of principles.
2. The realization of vertical integration of indicator systems for GSD in governance practice, establishing national network of indicator systems for GSD.
Within the new planning period in the country after 2020, the moment is right for making the indicator model as a standard for elaboration and assessment middle and long-term sustainable development planning documents but productive indicator system to adjust for the supervision of short term planning documents.
In order to achieve it, the following activities are required:
a) for the local level:
- purposeful work in providing information for municipality experts and training on application of indicator systems and method,
- implementation of indicator systems for GSD in several pilot territories, financing it from sources of support for development;
b) for the local and national level:
- to asses the indicator system already in use (Rīga and Saulkrasti) and experience of pilot territories as well as the experience of usage of indicator system for government planning documents („Latvia-2030” and NDP);
- to evaluate what kind of accumulated statistical data by municipal institutions and municipalities can be the basis for informative provision of network of indicator systems for GSD,
- to elaborate network concept of indicator systems for GSD, considering vertical and horizontal integration principles of indicator systems;
c) for the national level:
- to elaborate the models of indicator systems within this concept, that are suitable for practical application of GSD and integrated with TAPIS information system for the purposes of obtaining the necessary information for indicators and reflection of indicator results;
- to make amendments into the Law of Territory Development Planning that stipulate the usage of indicator system in long-term and middle-term development planning documents,
- to elaborate regulation of the Cabinet of Ministers prescribing the procedure of usage of these indicator systems.
34
3. The Observatory of coastal sustainability and integration of its results into decision making systems.
Considering territorial peculiarities for the governance of coastal sustainable development as well as the sea coast of Latvia, as the part of the territory of common interest of the Baltic Sea countries, it is reasonable to establish international information system for observation of coastal sustainability with its headquarters- observatory of coastal sustainability. This system would embrace morphologically homogenous coastal space- the Baltic Sea coast from Germany till Estonia - i.e., the Southern coast of the Baltic Sea. It is reasonable to establish the system on the well-known and already approbated system basis of coastal indicators in the Baltic countries, by adapting them to the conditions of specific territories, considering the peculiarities of the coast and also the peculiarities of information acquisition in the territories of Member states. The results of system’s operations must be based upon the complementarity of applied and academic research and be usable for information preparation for decision making purposes for HELCOM, national and local governance levels and must also become consistent and reliable source for public information about sustainability condition and processes in the coast of the Baltic Sea.
SOURCES Bossel H. (ed.) (1999) Indicators for Sustainable Development: Theory, Method,
Applications. A Report to the Balaton Group. IISD, 1999, 138p.
Bossel, H. (2001) Assessing viability and sustainability: a systems-based approach for deriving comprehensive indicator sets. Conservation Ecology 5(2): 12.
Brannen J. (2005) Mixing Methods: The Entry of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches into the Research Process, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8:3, 173-184
Brown, J., Reyntjens, D. (2005) INDECO: Indicators - An Overview Internal Paper for Discussion. 1st April 2005; link: http://www.ieep.eu/publications/pdfs/indeco/overviewdiscussion.pdf
Eindorfa A., Smita M. E (red.) (2008) Nacionālais ziņojums par vides stāvokli, VidM, 2008., 49p.
Hammond A. (ed.) (1995) Environmental indicators: a systematis approach to measuriong and reporting on environmental policy performance in the context of sustainable development. World resources institute, 1995, 58p.
George C. (2007), Sustainable Development and Global Governance. The Journal of Environment & Development, Volume 16 Number 1 March 2007 102-125
Kauliņš J., Vesperis V., Dombrovskis V. (2012) Latvijas ilgtspējīgas attīstības stratēģijas līdz 2030.gadam īstenošanas uzraudzības ziņojums. PKC. Riga, 2012. 127pp.
Meadows, D.H., Meadows D.L., Randers J., Behrens W.W. III. (1972) The Limits to Growth. Universe Books, New York, 1972.
35
Meadows D. (ed.) (1998) Indicators for Sustainable Development: Theory, Method, Applications. A Report to the Balaton Group. The Sustainability institute, 1998, 95p.
Osipovs J. (1962) Ķīmijas tehnoloģijas pamatprocesi un aparāti. Rīga: LVI, 1962., pp 114, 115.
Rydin Y.,Holman N., Wolff E. (2003) Local Sustainability IndicatorsLocal Environment, Vol. 8, No. 6, 581–589, December 2003
Yin, R.K. (1994) Case study research: design and methods. – 2nd ed., 1994 by Sage Publications, Inc., 172 p.)
Environmental indicators: Typology and overview (1999). EEA Technical report No25/1999
Four Dimensions of Sustainable Development (2010), http://www.unesco. org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_a/popups/mod04t01s03.html
Indicators of sustainable development: gudelines and methodologies. (1996) OECD, 1996, 49p.
Latvijas ilgtspējīgas attīstības stratēģija līdz 2030. gadam, (2010) VARAM, 2010., 100pp.
Latvijas Nacionālais attīstības plāns 2014. – 2020. gadam (2012). Pārresoru koordinācijas centrs, 2012., 69pp.
Overview „2012.gada pārskats par Rīgas ilgtermiņa attīstības stratēģijas līdz 2025.gadam un Rīgas attīstības programmas 2010.-2013.gadam ieviešanu” final report (2013b). Riga, 2013, 193pp.
Report of the United Nations conference on environment and development. (1992a) Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992
Supervising system for strategy of Riga city (2006), www.sus.lv/lv/strategija
Rīgas ilgtspējīgas attīstības stratēģija līdz 2030.gadam (2013a), apstiprināta ar Rīgas domes 22.10.2013. lēmumu Nr.302
Saulkrastu novada ilgtspējīgas attīstības stratēģija 25 gadu perspektīvā. Attīstības un ilgtspējības monitoringa indikatoru sistēmas lietošanas rokasgrāmata (2013). KBLC Ltd, 2013., 140pp.
United nation Environment programme (1992b) http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp? documentid= 52
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press., 383 p.; p.27.
36
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Doctoral thesis author is deeply grateful to:
� prof. Raimonds Ernšteins, my scientific supervisor, by constant support, valuable methodical assistance and infinite patience,
� prof. Pēteris Šķiņķis for careful reading of manuscript and principiallly significant remarks,
� administration of research areas: Aloja, Aglona, Beverīna, Cesvaine, Saulkrasti un Salacgrīva municipalities for co-operation and giving to possible to use financial and administrative resources of municipal planning for obtaining of important results and conclusions for Doctoral thesis,
� my family,
� my study members for creative atmosphere.