SI - Sustainability indicator

SSA - Systemic Sustainability Analysis

Ch1 - Sustainability and Sustainability Indicators, p.3-44

p.3 The Rio Summit [JLJ - 1992] agreed [on] a set of action points for sustainable development, collectively referred to as Agenda 21... governments that signed up to these have committed themselves to action. In order to put these points into practice, the summit established a mandate for the United Nations to establish a set of 'indicators of sustainable development' that will help to monitor progress. In fact, the idea of using indicators as a means of gauging sustainability has become extremely popular

p.5 The central idea behind the use of such indicators is very simple, and essentially they are designed to answer the question: 'How might I know objectively whether things are getting better or getting worse?' (Lawrence, 1997).

p.5 This book is all about the 'doing' of sustainable development.

p.6 many individuals have noted the need for measuring sustainability, and this chapter will discuss a few approaches in this direction and the problems that people have faced... An important point to make is that the use of simple indicators as a means of following change in complex systems is not new. Biological indicators have been widely employed in environmental science for many years

p.8 More recently, we have seen a continued concern over the application of genetic engineering within crops and animals and the coining of the term 'Frankenstein food' by critics.

[JLJ - still a problem in 2014]

p.22 Ecosystems can comprise thousands if not millions of different components... Clearly, with thousands, if not millions, of components and interactions in such a system, one cannot measure everything; instead, biologists focus on key components and interactions that represent the system as a whole.
 Given the extensive experience of farmers, biologists and others, an extension of the indicator approach into sustainability is certainly not surprising, and one could even say is inevitable.

p.27 Given that indicators have been widely employed by biologists for many years to gauge ecosystem health, it is not surprising that indicators (and indices, which are amalgams of indicators) have been seen by many as the core element in operationalizing sustainability.

p.32 Bossel (2001) has developed a system-based approach to developing [sustainability indicators] that is, perhaps, the most deeply rationalized of the four examples provided here. The framework attempts to provide a holistic vision of sustainability which recognizes that any system does not exist in isolation and that boundaries are permeable. No matter how we draw our boundaries, any system provides an influence and, in return, is influenced by other factors that exist outside those boundaries.

p.33 Bossel (2001) then goes on to suggest seven orientors of 'system viability': existence; effectiveness; freedom of action; security; adaptability; coexistence; psychological needs... Bossel (2001) attempts to address this by providing guidelines for the selection of SIs; but even so there is much room for personal choice.

p.40 In the developed world, we often have far more data than we can ever use. In most cases, what is lacking is not data but an understanding of what is important and the resolve to act. (Lawrence, 1997)

p.41 One of the major criticisms regarding SIs is that they attempt to encapsulate complex and diverse processes in a relatively few simple measures. This is not a new problem. The world is a complex place, and people have had to make sense of it for a long time!

p.41 Biologists have been dealing with complex ecosystems for many years, and they have long used indicators as a tool for gauging ecosystem health...

...just as we need not consider all cell-to-cell interactions whenever we discuss a single organism, so we need not consider all possible species-to-species interactions whenever we discuss ecosystems. (Slobodkin, 1994)

p.42 SIs are still a classic reductionist set of tools based on quantification.

p.42 Can we really use simple SIs to gauge such a complex issue as sustainability? Although aware of these pitfalls, many, of course, do just that. As Harrington (1992a) points out: 'it is never possible to deal with any problem (not just sustainability problems) in all its real-world complexity'. Scientists 'have to simplify to survive'. But how much simplification is acceptable? Clearly there is a trade-off between necessary simplification and at the same time having SIs that are meaningful. However, this is not a problem unique to sustainability or, indeed, to ecology. As Slobodkin (1994) states:

Any simplification limits our capacity to draw conclusions, but this is by no means unique to ecology. Essentially, all science is the study of either very small bits of reality or simplified surrogates for complex whole systems. How we simplify can be critical. Careless simplification leads to misleading simplistic conclusions.

p.43 Sustainability itself is a human vision that by definition is laced with human values... and SIs are not necessarily developed through a long process of hypothesis setting and testing, intending to arrive at a deeper understanding of sustainability... the starting point is a description of sustainability, with all of its human subjectivity, followed by an identification of SIs to gauge attainment of that description.

Ch2 - Sustainability Indicators in Practice, p.45-74

p.45 In Chapters 2 and 3 we... provide some examples of SIs in practice.

p.48 the concept of MSY [JLJ - maximum sustainable yield]: the number or biomass of individuals that can be removed from an ecosystem without driving the population down 

p.55 Quite clearly, MSY is a very simple concept, and equations evident in Boxes 2.1 to 2.3 do not fully take account of the complex nature of the ecosystem that MSY is meant to manage.

p.59 as Pitcher and Hart (1982) point out: 'MSY is seductively easy to calculate; in fact, no biologists need to be employed in the fishery and managers do not even have to get their hands and feet wet in examining actual fish.'

p.60 MSY as a management tool has gradually been replaced by other more sophisticated approaches

p.62-63 the AMOEBA approach... an acronym which in Dutch stands for 'general method for ecosystem description and assessment'. AMOEBA has one major advantage in that it is a highly visual approach to encapsulating sustainability.. As well as stressing the need for a visual representation of sustainability, Ten Brink et al (1991) took a broad view of sustainability and concluded that there were three categories of 'valuable characteristics, whose sustainability is desirable':

1. yield;
2. biodiversity;
3. self-regulation.

p.63 The second key element in their approach is to assume that they can define sustainability in terms of how far the current ecosystem departs from an identified 'reference' ecosystem... The third key element in the Ten Brink et al (1991) methodology is what to measure in order to gauge the three 'key characteristics'.

Ch3 - Indicators, Cities, Institutions and Projects, p.75-97 

p.79 Sustainability may be defined as a dynamic balance among three mutually interdependent elements:

1. protection and enhancement of natural ecosystems and resources;
2. economic productivity; and
3. provision of social infrastructure such as jobs, housing, education, medical care and cultural opportunities. (Dominski et al, 1992)

Ch4 - Paradigms and Professionals, p.101-132

p.103 [Chambers]

The reality, of which core professionals perceive only the simplified shadows, is in contrast a diversity: of people, of farming systems and livelihoods, each a complex whole, concrete and changing. But professionals reconstruct that reality to make it manageable in their own alien analytic terms, seeking and selecting the universal in the diverse, the part in the whole, the simple in the complex, the controllable in the uncontrollable, the measurable in the immeasurable...

p.107 [Dawkins]

If I ask an engineer how a steam engine works... What I would want to hear is something about how the parts of an engine interact with each other to produce the behaviour of the whole engine.

p.108 There is another problem with reductionist approaches. Dividing an entity means that the concept of wholeness is often rendered dead by the process of examination! Studying 'dead' parts can be informative, but can often do little to help us understand the living whole... If one considers the world as disconnected parts, rather than as an inclusive whole, the resulting worldview can be restricted in terms of understanding the relationships and processes which combine to make the whole.

p.109 Systems approached as wholes are fundamental and need to be understood in their entirety. To break them down into elements is to lose the point of the wholeness... To adopt an approach that deals with wholes has many implications. Possibly the first point is to recognize that the premise of the traditional reductionist scientist - which is that the knowing process works by 'a procedure or theory that reduces complex data or phenomena to simple terms' - is no longer valid for us... if we are to understand complex wholes, we will need to adopt a different paradigm or extend the old.

p.110 To make holism work we need to grasp the principles of systems thinking, which lie at its heart.

p.111 One view of the systems approach is, as the American systems thinker Peter Senge puts it, the primacy of the whole:

The primacy of the whole suggests that relationships are, in a genuine sense, more fundamental than things, and that wholes are primordial to parts. We do not have to create interrelatedness. The world is already interrelated. Senge et al. (1994, p25)

A system is a perceived whole whose elements 'hang together' because they continually affect each other over time and operate toward a common purpose. The word descends from the Greek verb sunistanai, which originally meant: 'to cause to stand together'. As this origin suggests, the structure of a system includes the quality of perception with which you, the observer, cause it to stand together [emphasis added]. Senge et al. (1994, p90)

p.112 If a system is purposeful then it might be expected to seek its own continuance and therefore sustainability.

p.123 All indicators can, if required, be developed as indicators of sustainability

p.126-127 measuring sustainability... cannot be done because sustainability itself is not a single element. Or better, it can be done but it will be done badly, oversimplifying complexity and reducing a variety of relevant and legitimate views and understandings to the dominant mindset of the scientist. A facade of objectivity can be generated... but it is just that - a facade.

p.127 Sustainability is, we believe, a highly complex and contested term open to a wide variety of interpretations and conceptualizations. In short, it is a concept dependent upon the various perceptions of the stakeholders residing within the problem context. Sustainability is not an absolute quantity to be measured.

p.129 For sustainability, it is important to develop future plans that are capable of meeting the needs of tomorrow as well as today. Scenario-making is one means of grappling with the significant and unpredictable issue of possible futures.

p.129 Michel Godet - a major thinker in the 'French School' of scenario planning - has commented: 'Unfortunately there are no statistics for the future'

p.130 No one can predict the future. Many people have tried - from prophets to mathematicians - but most predictions go awry... However we can identify a number of possible futures, and especially the areas in which major change is likely to occur. Scenario planning is one way of doing this.

p.130-131 Scenario-making can be seen as an element of a systemic approach to intervention - as an additional means to improve decision-making... Scenarios are alternative images: possibilities, not predictions. Scenarios are not just wild guesses or science fiction stories... Scenarios should help managers to become aware of the mental models and frames of reference they operate in, and not leave them caught up in their 'mental ruts'.

p.131 Sustainability can provide a qualitative measure of the integral nature and wholeness of any given system.

p.132 Measures of sustainability can be valuable aids to future planning, forecasting and awareness-building.

Ch5 - Projects and Sustainability Indicators, p.133-152

p.133 this chapter will develop our thinking concerning the specific use of sustainability indicators (SIs) in development projects.

p.135 The idea of seeking to measure how futures might develop and evolve is the domain of scenario planning or Prospective

p.136-137 The traditional blueprint approach [JLJ - to a project], while being cyclical in presentation, is not iterative or explicitly inclusive of stakeholders' views. It is arguable whether the cycle is really a cycle at all... Cusworth and Franks... suggested an 'adaptive' [JLJ - project] model. This implies adaptive to the environment and able to change as the environment, in which the project system operates, changes. Building upon the systems view of Maturana (1997) and Maturana and Varela (1992)... the environment is seen as being an inclusive part of the project itself. At any stage the project may need to alter as it affects and is affected by the environment.

[JLJ - The software industry has keyed on the Cusworth and Franks idea and developed the Agile project methodology.]

p.139 Whether we like it or not, sustainability will largely continue to be 'done' through projects. Thus, or concern is to consider and interpret sustainability within developmental projects.

p.147-148 Systemic Sustainability Analysis (SSA) defined as the participatory deconstruction and negotiation of what sustainability means to a group of people, along with the identification and method of assessment of indicators to assess that vision of sustainability. SSA is, thus, based on a number of fundamental assumptions:

• Sustainability is a subjective feature of any system...
• Stakeholders have a right to be heard...
• ...what comprises sustainability can be negotiated...
• A set of SIs can be identified with which to assess that agreed vision of sustainability.
• The SIs may be assessed either quantitatively or qualitatively in order to chart progress (or not) towards the goal or, indeed, to project 'what if' scenarios.
• 'Values' of SIs can be identified by the group...
• ...In order for the SIs to be 'used' there needs to be a compromise between technical excellence and a form of presentation that allows for easy assimilation.
• SIs have no value in themselves unless they are used...

Ch6 - Imagine: An Example of a Systemic Sustainability Analysis, p.153-192

p.153 we develop the use of the Imagine approach as an example of a Systemic Sustainability Analysis (SSA).

p.155-156 the Imagine approach... The steps are as follows:

1. Understand the context.
2. Agree upon sustainability indicators and bands of equilibrium.
3. Develop the AMOEBA approach and scenario-making.
4. Conduct a review and engage in meta-scenario-making.
5. Publicize and market the message.

...While Imagine was developed for a specific context, it can be adapted to any context and, hence, we feel that the main elements of the approach can be applied in a number of ways

p.159 the rich picture is a fairly unstructured tool for summarizing everything you know about a situation. It is used as a means to develop understanding of context

p.159-160

...the idea is to get from finding out to action by doing some systems thinking about the situation. To get started on this you need some efficient, economical and illuminating way of summarizing or representing the situation in all its complexity. You do this by building a cartoon-type representation of it. (Open University, 1987, Block IV, p21)

p.160 The picture... is the method used by researchers to express their understanding of the project. As a personal tool, it is a useful, heuristic device.

p.168 SIs are the result of global processes and may appear irrelevant and alien to many stakeholders.

p.170 The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) describe sustainability as:

Sustainable development is not a 'fixed state of harmony'. Rather, it is an ongoing process of evolution in which people take actions leading to development that meets their current needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. (Hardi and Zdan, 1997, p9)

p.170 At this point it is important to describe what we expect an SI to indicate. In Chapters 2 and 5 we described the DPSIR, or drivers, pressure, state, impact and response SIs and explored the current interest in the development of pressures SIs, in particular, as a means of explaining sustainable or unsustainable activities and outcomes.

p.176 Sustainability involves the maintenance or continuity of project outcomes over time... The focus of this stage in the Imagine process is to provide the project with SIs that will be collectable, viable and feasible for an indefinite period. If this is not the case, the SI itself is non-sustainable.

p.186 In terms of time, an SI or a collection of SIs is a snapshot and nothing more... An SI is not just a flag, marking some problem; it should also point the way to a course of action. A rich picture of the SI context might be useful, setting out the structures and processes which such a result would indicate

p.191 We have indicated that SIs work well in well-defined projects with clear boundaries and agreed goals.

p.192 The Imagine approach is one way of putting SSA into practice and is, of course, adaptable to circumstances.

Ch7 - Sustainability Indicators: The Rhetoric and the Reality, p.195-207

p.195 Throughout the review and rewriting of this book we have been chasing a moving shadow called sustainability... there is no single meaning and there is no agreement on how it is measured and recognized in an objective sense.

p.199 since sustainability has to be measured to be meaningful, what else can one do but use indicators? The fact that indicators by definition must simplify a complex entity is not ignored, and the question therefore becomes: what indicators will reflect an individual's vision of sustainability?

[JLJ - Certain things are indicated only indirectly - due to the complexity of the current predicament - and so we might use diagnostic tests such as scenario construction in order to estimate sustainability. If we seek evidence of an ability to stretch and adapt, and to withstand certain forces that tend to degrade, while exhibiting signs of growth or a thriving, then a diagnostic test might be our indicator of choice.]