Bedrich Moldan
Decision-making processes operate at all levels of government and within many other decision-making bodies in any society. Decisions taken are shaped by human values, traditions, biases, and innumerable inputs from many directions. Information plays a crucial role in any case. The effectiveness and rationality of the process can be substantially enhanced by the use of appropriate information. Indicators may help by providing tools specific for each phase of the cycle.
In this case, the focus regarding the decision-making cycle is primarily at the national level and on issues of sustainable development. Several steps for the societal decision-making process can be identified in the context of development and the use of indicators. Bakkes et al. (1994) recommends a simple three-phase model:
However, a more structured scheme is probably more illuminating, such as the four- stage cycle recommended in the UNEP/DPCSD Discussion Paper (1995) or the five-stage arrangement proposed in this box (see Figure 1).
PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION
Some environmental and sustainable development problems seem obvious today. They are now recognized as issues or problems to be solved. In each case, the first step is to define a phenomenon as a problem. Yet some of the most important global environmental problems are not clearly observable and understandable, so their identification is difficult.
The problem of global stratospheric ozone can serve as an example. It has been known for many decades that the existence of the ozone layer is essentially a shield against the sun's harmful ultraviolet radiation that is dangerous for the biosphere. It was only at the beginning of the 1970s that some scientists began to argue that this vital layer could be threatened by certain man-made chemicals (e.g. chlorofluorocarbons). It took several years until a 'critical mass' of the scientific community became persuaded that the problem does exist and is indeed important. It was at this stage that the development of indicators began. Problem identification was made easier because the use of a simple indicator could characterize the issue in a clear and persuasive manner.
PUBLIC AWARENESS RAISING, PROBLEM ACKNOWLEDGMENT
In the first stage of the decision-making cycle, the general public is involved only to a limited extent. In the second phase, however, public participation is absolutely essential. The majority of society must be persuaded that the identified problems are real and important. Furthermore, it is necessary to make real efforts towards solving them. Many environmental and sustainable development problems are 'competing' with other urgent issues in society. On the one hand, these problems are connected with the other issues and cannot be approached in isolation. On the other hand, however, they are specific and in competition with the others for public recognition and hence, for the speed of efforts and resources devoted to their solution.
The role of powerful information, preferably in the form of a few clearly understandable and strong indicators, is obvious. The role of indicators is very important in this second stage of the cycle.
At the same time, it should be sufficiently clear that the indicators must be not only scientifically valid, technically feasible and policy relevant, but they must also be presented in an appealing manner. Indicators must also be scrupulously accurate, otherwise the possible short-term gains can be lost over the long term, which could be detrimental to the entire sustainability cause.
POLICY FORMULATION
When formulating policies, it is necessary to set quantitative targets or, at least, qualitative goals. Defining a set of specific indicators is an inherent part of the formulation of specific policies. This phase is more or less a dialogue between the decision-making body (usually government) and the 'target audience' (e.g. part of the public that is somehow affected by the proposed policies). Without a comprehensive set of specific indicators, such a dialogue cannot be valid. It follows that the introduction of appropriate indicators is essential for both parties of the dialogue.
The problems of sustainability are often complex and so are the solutions comprising many policy options. For a proper evaluation of these options, a broad range of information must be analysed, sometimes with the aid of complex calculations, models, etc. The need for simple and easily understandable indicators should clearly be the result of complex analyses.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION
Indicators are not only an inherent part of policy formulation; they also play a crucial role in the implementation phase. This phase is primarily the responsibility of the implementing agency at a local, subnational, national or international level. However, success of a policy is not possible without broad and active public support. A clear view of agreed targets and unremitting assessment of the progress achieved at any given point are important components of adopted policy measures.
Policy implementation is probably the most difficult and time-consuming phase of the whole decision-making cycle. It requires not only sufficient determination and endurance, but also patience and a certain degree of flexibility. The situation can dramatically change in time and that change must be reflected in the implementation phase. There may be a change not only in the quantitative expression of targets, but even in the qualitative corrections in the nature of indicators. Active cooperation between all the parties involved is an essential element of implementation.
POLICY EVALUATION
The evaluation of the adopted policy measures has two broad goals. First, it is necessary to assess whether or not the formulated policies have indeed been executed. Have the envisaged laws actually passed? If yes, are they adequately enforced? Have all the good intentions been followed by concrete actions? Have the implemented measures resulted in the anticipated results? Have the stated targets been achieved?
Secondly, provided the policies were successful, the question remains whether or not the original problem is really solved. Is the current situation 'under control'? In other words, were the theoretical assumptions correct and the societal answers well designed and effective? Here, again, the case of the protection of the stratospheric ozone is illuminating. In a relatively short period of time, after the adoption of the Montreal Protocol, it became clear that internationally accepted measures - even if successfully and fully implemented - would not be sufficient to effectively protect the stratospheric ozone. New commitments were therefore accepted under the London and Copenhagen Amendments of the Montreal Protocol. Both the scientific community and an interested segment of the world's population are now satisfied and hope that, if the provisions of the two amendments are fulfilled effectively, the ozone layer will eventually recover.
By going through this fifth stage, the full cycle of the decision-making process is completed. If the results are satisfactory, it is a job well done. If not, the cycle starts again with problem identification, followed by the other steps, as was the case with the protection of the ozone. During this phase, the role of indicators is again a crucial one for the evaluation of policy implementation, both in narrow and broad terms.
REFERENCES
Bakkes, J.A., et al. (1994) An Overview of Environmental Indicators: State of the art and perspectives. RIVM/UNEP.
UNEP/DPCSD Discussion Paper (1995) In: Gouzee, N, et al. Indicators of Sustainable Development for Decision Making. Report of the Workshop of Ghent, Belgium, 9-11 January.