How ecological indicators construction reveals social changes—The case of lakes and rivers in France

Abstract

Social and scientific factors are deeply enmeshed in each other within the development and the use of ecological indicators (EI). Yet low research has assessed which factors contribute to selecting ecological indicators on the long-term. This article proposes to study the historical construction of EI by examining ecological, political, and social background of specific places where EI were developed, in France on lakes and rivers. Our major findings in France were that ecological indicators were never optimised for the present market or political arena. Instead EI development was typically recycling previous tools that were elaborated for other purposes by environmentally committed outsiders, without regular funding. We found that regular funding for monitoring an EI was only provided when it matched an institution's goal. Beyond the geographically limited relevance of the case studies, these results therefore improve the theoretical framework we deploy when constructing or relying on indicators.

Fresh Water-Related Indicators in Canada: An Inventory and Analysis

“…There was agreement amongst the 2008 Water Security Survey follow-up interview candidates, that while indicators in general are influential (to both public and government), environmental indicators are not having any visible influence on policy. This was attributed to a number of factors: a lack of communication between the creators of indices and the end-users who, the literature suggests, should be engaged from the early stages of indicator development in order to achieve buy-in and success (Bond et al, 2005a;Brennin, 2007;Community Indicators Consortium, 2007;Bouleau et al, 2009); the slow pace with which indicators are released is inhibiting their influence on policy cycles (currently in Canada, federal environmental indicators are typically released two years after the data has been collected (Brennin, 2007;Statistics Canada, 2009)); and accessibility of indicators (the current indicator landscape is too complex and indicator information is exceedingly hard to locate, compare, and applyparticularly between jurisdictions).…”

“…Many of the gaps and narrow scope of indicators in the inventory likely reflect limited data. Bouleau et al (2009) suggests that most effective way to improve data monitoring for environmental indicators is through legal enforcement. Referencing the historical development of environmental indicators in France, culminating in the European Union Water Framework Directive (WFD), Bouleau et al (2009) states that binding legislation has been critical in systematic environmental monitoring in France.…”

“…Data form the foundation blocks upon which indicators are built, and therefore play a fundamental role in developing indicators (United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), 2003;Fitzgibbon et al, 2006;Policy Research Initiative, 2007;Bouleau et al, 2009). Yet, there are concerns regarding gaps in monitoring networks, limited data availability and inconsistencies in existing data (NRTEE, 2010;CESD, 2010;British Columbia Office of the Auditor General, 2010;Bond et al, 2005a;Brennin, 2007).…”

“…Although the use of environmental indicators dates back to the end of the 19 th Century (Bouleau et al, 2009), it was not until the late 1980s that their application become widespread, following the publication of Our Common Future by the Brundtland Commission, formally the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) in 1987 (Sagar and Najam, 1998;Bell and Morse, 2003;Böhringer and Jochem, 2007;Pintér et al, 2005; United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA), 2007; United Nations Division for Sustainable Development (UN DSD), 2008). This report pushed the concept of sustainable development to the forefront of government policy, and was followed by a sustained increase in national and international environmental reporting initiatives, which were reinforced by subsequent international initiatives (notably Agenda 21 (Chapter 40), the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), and the subsequent 2002 Johannesburg Environmental Summit, Rio +10).…”

Les conditions de référence de la directive cadre européenne sur l’eau face à la dynamique des hydrosystèmes et des usages

“…Elle suppose que l'on puisse séparer ce qui relève d'une action de l'homme et ce qui relève de la dynamique propre d'un système naturel. Cela est relativement possible pour des pressions locales, à condition toutefois que des acteurs se soient mobilisés pour les rendre visibles publiquement et mesurables avec des indicateurs d'état écologique (Bouleau, 2006 ;Bouleau et al, 2009). Mais dans le cas des cours d'eau en permanence traversés par des flux solides, liquides et chimiques en provenance de l'amont, les transformations immémoriales des bassins versants par l'homme (y compris la nature des couverts forestiers) rendent illusoire la définition d'un état non impacté.…”