The ISO 14031 standard to guide the urban sustainability measurement process: an Italian experience

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1247e1257 www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

The ISO 14031 standard to guide the urban sustainability measurement process: an Italian experience Antonio Scipioni*, Anna Mazzi, Filippo Zuliani, Marco Mason CESQA, C/O University of Padua, Department of Chemical Processes in Engineering, Via Marzolo 9, 35131 Padua, Italy Received 6 November 2006; received in revised form 27 January 2007; accepted 5 June 2007 Available online 30 August 2007

Abstract The international debate on sustainable development policies focuses its intervention programmes on the urban context and, according to the principles of participation and subsidiarity, emphasizes the needs to define suitable indicators in order to represent complex problems in a simple way. However, in literature, common positions that acknowledge effective indicators are not yet available: if the utility in adopting reference descriptions and common indicators selection criteria is well established, the claim to define effective lists of indicators for all urban contexts is effective nowadays. In the experience lead by the Municipality of Padua, the standard ISO 14031, that describes the requirements relevant to the environmental performance assessment, was used as reference. In particular, in Padua, within the Local Agenda 21 urban process, the definition of context and performance indicators has followed up in different ways as long as it has pursued different goals: the context indicators, defined by a top-down process, describe the contingent circumstances in which the Forum operates, whereas performance indicators, defined by a participative process, measure the progress of the Local Action Plan, defined by the Forum, and its effectiveness in the future. The conclusions of the research allow to formulate a reference conceptual model that highlights the typical informative requirements of a Local Agenda 21 urban process, and at the same time, solve them proposing the sustainability evaluation as a continuous process. Thanks to both the context and performance indicators, the proposed process is able to analyse the complexity of the urban problems as well as to support decision-making facilitating the sharing of targets. Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Urban sustainability; Context indicators and performance indicators; ISO 14031 model; Measurement process; Citizens participation; Local Agenda 21

1. Introduction 1.1. The use of indicators to support the decision-making process for local sustainable development The concept of sustainable development is charged with complexities as it involves and balances three different goals: the utility for economic development, the equity for social development and the ecological integrity for environmental development. Therefore, an appropriate approach management system is essentially required [1].

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ393498275536; fax: þ390498275785. E-mail address: [email protected] (A. Scipioni). 0959-6526/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2007.06.013

To be analysed and carried out through a decision-making process, sustainability must be measured. Agenda 21 itself, singles out, among main successful factors for sustainable development projects, the availability of information, diagnosis activity and monitoring capability [2,3]. Thus, effective policies elaboration, and thus fulfilment and assessment in the future will be successful, if they arise from economics, social and environmental evaluation, based on reliable informations and data [4]. The indicators, by simplifying complex phenomenons, may help politicians and citizens to define individual or collective targets, linking them to clear goals and reaching them with concrete projects [5]. The main function of the indicator, in fact, is to briefly represent the investigated problems in a way that preserves the informative content of the analysis.

1248

A. Scipioni et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1247e1257

Sustainability indicators are able to carry out fundamental role as interface between science, politics and society: measuring sustainable development allows the entrance of social and environmental themes in the political and economical discussion [6]. To achieve this target, in order to ensure neutrality, the indicators shall be used as a scientific and objective tool. It is essential to define them by a transparent process and by consulting all those people that are interested in realising sustainable ways, especially on a local scale [7]. The interest in developing sustainability indicators is widely shared in literature. However, the difficulty to build indicators able to face the tridimensionality of sustainable development associates many measurement experiences on local level and consequentially literature [8]. Moreover, it is often recognized the difficulty of measuring without interruption and, as a consequence, the impossibility, in many cases, of formulating assessment relevant to the changes of the considered indicators in the future [9]. Because of the exploitable function that characterizes the selection of indicators, their choice should not be considered only as a technical issue. The definition of sustainability indicators becomes, ever and unavoidably, a political issue leading to important consequences [10]. To be an effective tool in supporting local development, the evaluation of sustainability made by indicators should be based on indicators selected at a local level, providing the overall view of the situation. The indicators must clearly represent what is happening in a specific region and towards which direction the development is addressed [11]. When the identification of universal indicators is difficult, the settlement of local indicators can be useful, even if not necessary. In particular, in order to face the complexity of sustainable development and the strong interrelationship among environmental, economical and social issues which characterize the sustainable development, for the context to be observed, it is essential to use indicators that usually need to be set as ‘‘ad hoc’’ [12]. 1.2. The ISO 14031 standard The ISO 14031 is an international standard that set the guidelines to assess environmental performances in an environmental management system. The requirements of ISO 14031, support the organisations in measuring their own environmental performances, or their results obtained in time, thanks to the management of significant environmental aspects and, to the evaluation of their own relationship with the environment [13]. ISO 14031 is an effective reference tool for anyone that intends to develop suitable measurement, evaluation, description and own environmental performance communications systems [14]. The main ISO 14031 standard issue is the selection and definition of parameters in a position to univocally indicate the environmental performance of a certain organisation. The ISO 14031 standard does not define unequivocally these parameters, but outlines an analytic tool for their

definition, identifying criteria on the basis of the evaluating issues selection. Thus, it will be able to obtain essential, clear and exhausted informations, measuring quantitatively and referable to economical evaluations ([15], Annex III, paragraph 3.3). The concept of this standard is: ‘‘what it can be measured, it can also be managed!’’ [16]. In effect, an organisation may have a good intention, but if an appropriate measuring and evaluation system is not available, lot of positive intentions cannot be achieved [17]. The evaluation can be used in different but complementary ways. They can be used internally, to promote the continuing improvement of the environmental performances, in particular to support other management systems, as an Environmental Management System in accordance with ISO 14001 standard [18] or coherently with the requirements of the European Regulation EMAS II [15]. The informations that result from the evaluation of the performances of an organisation can also be used to communicate with external stakeholders and to support the reporting operations of the company [15]. The ISO 14031 standard suggests to adopt the performances evaluation as a continuing process in time, by which the environmental performances are measured, analysed, evaluated, reported and communicated grounding on specific and defined criteria (see Fig. 1). The environmental performances evaluation is a tool that develops itself in the logic of continuous improvement [19]. It is properly a process that must be carried out continuously and in a recurring way towards improvement, through the definitions of indicators that allow to assess the pursuit of the objectives set. If the objectives drive the organisation toward the improvement of its environmental performances, the assessment process promotes continuous improvement insofar as the indicators used are consistent with the objectives set, and represent the objectives achievement in time. The ISO 14031 standard method is recognized to be a winning tool adopted by organisations for these three reasons [20]: 1. it can be adopted by every single organisation, without applicability limits, neither for activity type nor for dimensions; 2. it is suitable to represent the temporal performances, permitting efficacious comparisons considering the modifications caused by the context and by the decisions taken; 3. it helps the communication and sharing of performances, suggesting the adoption of informative methods relevant to context in which the methodologies are used.

1.3. Context and performance indicators of ISO 14031 standard In accordance with the approach the ISO 14031 standard, the informations that drive the improvement of environmental performances, have to be managed appropriately. That is why in the definition of suitable assessment tools, the standard

A. Scipioni et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1247e1257

1249

Fig. 1. The environmental performance evaluation as a process. Source: ISO 14031: 2000, p. 6, Fig. 1: ‘‘Environmental performance evaluation’’.

recommends to adopt two different categories of indicators: performance and context indicators [21]. The Environmental Performance Indicators are pertinent to the environmental performances gained in time: they inform on the environmental performances of the organisation; they must be chosen according to the activities carried out and must inform on the capability of the organisation in pursuing specific goals towards the environmental improvement. The Environmental Context Indicators are related to the environmental conditions in which an organisation is integrated: they can be applied to local, regional, national and global contexts. They do not directly assess the environmental impacts of the activities of an organisation but give informations on the environmental issues that the organisation have to face.

2. Research structure: methodological references 2.1. Objectives and methodology of research The achievement of sustainable development is based on the local community capability to realise economical, environmental and social policies, that promote development and are interrelated and synergic among themselves. Therefore, the availability of indicators that permit analysis of

interconnecting aspects can help the long lasting local development carrying out and planning, also in the management of the territory [22]. Weaknesses come out from literature analysis. They concern actual tools available for a local community to measure the sustainability of its own actions. It is not always easy to find out measurement instruments able to monitor and assess the multidimensionality of sustainable development; on the other hand, the adoption of complex and heterogeneous indicators that enclose all sustainability dimensions, is not always the right choice in order to promote the sharing process on which Local Agenda 21 process should be based. To fill these gaps, it is useful to consider tools and methods that are successfully used in other contexts. Among these, the ISO 14031 standard can apply to local and urban sustainability measurement and can bear Local Agenda 21 process, promoting sharing and participation, guiding planning and permitting the monitoring of the actions undertaken. In accordance with defined goals, the research, carried out from 2002 to 2005, is a quantitative research, whose target is to confirm the method applied within the case study [23]. This is a very widespread methodological choice in literature: in the measurement of urban sustainability, in fact, beside the importance of theoretical contribution, there are many applied research experiences that follow a quantitative approach and use the methodology of a single case study.

1250

A. Scipioni et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1247e1257

2.2. ISO 14031 standard in a Local Agenda 21 process Even though it is a tool designed to support an Environmental Management System, the ISO 14031 standard suggests the organisations on how to structure the evaluation as a continuous process, in accordance with a general development strategy [24]. The ISO 14031 standard set a series of requirements to determine and realise a performances evaluation process that go far beyond the evaluation of the environmental performances. In general every organisation can take advantages of the evaluation management as a continuous and ever complex process [19]. The environmental performances evaluation, as a measure of the environmental and other economical activity interactions, can become a useful tool also for the public administrations that effectively intend to manage the environmental issues at a local level, without underestimating the existing interconnections among environmental, social and economical development issues. If the adoption of indicators helps in the analysis of many informations, the evaluation, as a process, allows the use of measures to drive policies, through the implementation of concrete and effective improvement plans as long as they respond to the strengths and weaknesses emerged from the analysis of the indicators. The adaptation of this methodology to measure the sustainability in the urban context may answer the need of consistent informations. In that case, the references outline, to realise sustainable development on urban and local level, is certainly the Local Agenda 21 (LA21), understood as a process oriented to define and put into practice a Local Action Plan for a local sustainable development in the middle and long period [25]. As the model proposed by the international references of an urban sustainable development suggest [26], from the sharing of principles and from a global shared view, it is possible to observe and analyse local problems and identify the possible solutions that lead to the definition programmes that involve all the stakeholders of the project, thanks to the building of a widespread consent. Therefore, following once again the steps of a typical LA21 process, is possible to know how a local community can obtain significant results thanks to the adoption of the principles suggested by ISO 14031 [21]. In the first steps of the context analysis, indicators are a perfect tool to recognise the start up situation and to identify the action areas. In the planning, the performances evaluation guide the local community in the formulation of possible scenarios and in the evaluation of some options, till it will define suitable Local Action Plans, including the planning of the actions in the most effective ways and times. During the fulfilment of the Local Action Plan, the use of indicators permit the local community to verify the implementation of the actions established and to monitor their effectiveness, verifying the changes in time and measuring the contribution to the sustainability. At last, during the auditing of the LA21 process, thanks to the use of indicators, the community can evaluate the results achieved and recognise new opportunities to act in the years to follow.

2.3. Context and performance indicators to measuring local sustainability The Forum, which is the typical sharing and participation tool for LA21 process, is the perfect place to start an analysis of the context and to suppose and discuss sustainability solutions [2]. The adoption of indicators can help the Forum to analyse the local unsustainable issues, to share possible scenarios and finally to define an effective Local Action Plan, effective because concrete and, at the same time, known by everybody. In effect, when someone tackles the problem of performances evaluation, is possible to adopt many different approaches to project and manage the system of sustainability measurement, and there are many available tools to measure. However, so many times it takes the risk of evaluations well known by the authorised group, but so little shared by common people [27,28]. On the other hand, through the participative process, LA21 suggests how to achieve the solutions shared. To do that, it is necessary to adopt measurement methods in order to promote a shared knowledge of the situations and performances: the use of simple and direct language, in the measurement, helps to clearly understand and guides to recognise the critical state and intervention priority [26]. Applied to the LA21 process, the ISO 14031 standard can answer to these expectations, because it can interpret it in the following way. The performance indicators must be defined to monitor the efforts of the community in realising sustainable development on a local level. Their roles are to measure the output of the defined Local Action Plan, from an economical, social and environmental point of view. Performance indicators, therefore, will be effective if they are able to evaluate the realisation level of the actions established in the plan and their effectiveness in improving the life quality of the community. Context indicators are used to describe the economical, social and environmental situations in which local communities act. They have to represent, continuously, in time, the sustainability conditions that characterize the territory, independently from the defined Local Action Plan. Thanks to context indicators it is possible to knowledge the parameters that conditions the situation in which the local community acts, to evaluate their sustainability and the criticality of some actions compared to others. 3. Running of the research 3.1. Presentation of context: Padua Municipality and ‘‘PadovA21’’ project The context chosen to run the research is the Municipality of Padua, in the NortheEast of Italy. Padua is one of the seven capitals of the Province of the Venetian, is a medium-small city, is on the line Milan, Venice. It is a prestigious university city and it has a lively industry; the municipal territory has a surface of almost 93 km2 and a resident population of almost 210,000 inhabitants. With its

A. Scipioni et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1247e1257

own peculiarities and the LA21 process, the Padua Municipality opens interesting development opportunities to the research. The city is familiar with the concept of sustainable development: in fact the different administrations that managed the municipality in the past, drew up many projects to drive the city towards a sustainable and durable development. At the beginning of 2002, the Municipality of Padua has officially started a process towards local sustainability, named ‘‘Padova Sostenibile, PadovA21’’, coordinated by the Environmental Sector, that has involved all the public and private subjects who, interested in the promotion of local and urban sustainability, have the task to set and realise actions [29,30]. In fact, the ‘‘PadovA21’’ project, promoted by the Municipality of Padua, was realised in cooperation with the Regional Agency for Environmental Protection (ARPA Veneto), the Padua University and the Padua Hospital, and raised funds in 2002 by the Ministry of the Environment. Within the project implementation, starting from 2002, a civic Forum was formed. This, which has already shared the scenarios of development [31], then worked in four different thematic groups, and drafted, at the end of 2003, a Local Action Plan, discussed and implemented in 2004 [32]. The context of Padua was interesting for the trial of new tools and methods to better evaluate local sustainability and the ‘‘PadovA21’’ project itself was suitable to be reinterpreted to better fulfill these requirements. This lead to the chance of experimenting the formulation of sustainability indicators in Padua, also by a participative process, inside the Forum of LA21 [31].

1251

3.2. The application of the ISO 14031 standard to the PadovA21 project: reference scheme In accordance with the process that implement a LA21 [26, p. 5], the PadovA21 project set for the Municipality of Padua, provided with a process of realisation in which the definition of suitable indicators is determinant for the success of the project [31]. With PadovA21 Project, it was possible to project the research in order to formulate indicators that able to completely satisfy the necessity of the typical sustainability measurement in a local community. To do that, an interpretative model that underlines the information needs to which answer with specific indicators, was drawn up. The Fig. 2 shows the reference framework scheme. Fig. 2 highlights the correspondence between the steps of LA21 process and the needs of informations. These needs should be satisfied by different indicators designed for each step. In the starting phase of the process, the civic Forum is asked to share a view of the city, and then to set goals of general development in the middleelong term. To do that, using indicators describing economical, social and environmental context (highlighting force and critical states in which is appropriate to act, and promoting synthetics analysis, simplifying the observed informations complexity and taking overall view) is suitable. In the next step, that encompasses the goals setting and the plan verification, therefore it is useful to have detailed informations that lead towards a concrete planning. Once the Local Action Plan has been established by the civic Forum, its fulfilment can be supported by indicators

Fig. 2. Measurement exigency in an LA21 process. Source: authors elaboration.

1252

A. Scipioni et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1247e1257

and by evaluation, permitting to verify the effectiveness of actions themselves with respect to established goals. This helps also a shared vision and established priorities of intervention. Therefore, in the action phase, indicators must be consistent and significant with the established Local Action Plan. Then they have to be able to evaluate changes in time, also in the middleelong term. 4. The research outcomes 4.1. Criteria to define context indicators Indicators should be referred to as tools to analyse situations, and so, should be chosen in order to produce the most simple and clear analysis. From past experiences in various scientific sectors, with respect to the sustainability measurement, indicators, to be good observation and analysis tools, must include four fundamental characteristics [33]: - particular phenomenon relevance with respect to general situation: indicators have to fulfill the purpose they have been defined for; - understanding attitude of the indicator and of its trend in time: informations communicated by indicators have to be clear and easily comprehensible, also by people not expert of the phenomenon represented; - synthetic representation reliability to the overall problem: what is shown by the indicators must correspond to the reality; - relevant informations availability: indicators must give timely informations, in order to allow timely measures interventions to solve problems. On the basis of these four characteristics, context indicators were chosen to know economical, environmental and social conditions of Padua Municipality. 4.2. Context indicators choice for Padua To comply the first three criteria (relevance, easy understanding, reliability), the choice was made starting from indicators nationally and internationally acknowledged as valid. At last, to comply the fourth criterion, relevant to the informations availability, indicators choice has been guided by the real availability of data reliable on a local level. For the sake of using, for the Municipality of Padua, context indicators consistent with above-mentioned principles, some main sources from which informations drawn, have been identified in order to obtain a synthetic, clear and correct representation of the urban context. Such sources refer to previous experiences of Padua Municipality and other urban situations: - socio-economical indicators, proposed by the World Health Organisation and used by Padua Municipality in the City Health Project [34,35];

- Urban Ecosystem Indicators, promoted in Italy by Legambiente organisation [36]; - Quality of Life Indicators, promoted in Italy by II Sole 24 Ore journal [37]; - social and economical indicators, used by Social Statistic Department of Italian National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT) [38]. By cited sources, it was possible to identify 70 indicators for Padua Municipality, pertinent to the context: they concern eight different thematic sectors (population, mobility, soundness, society, economic, tourism, car accidents, environment) and synthesis main sustainability aspects of economical, environmental and social examined context [39]. Therefore, context indicators, pertinent to every sector, were calculated for one period of time (generally for five years from 1997 to 2001) and for every chosen indicator it was possible to knowledge the trend in time, thanks to a simple but effective graphical analysis [40]. The designing of the indicators is mainly referred to official statistics on national and local level, or to data collection edited by public administrations or their specialized research centers [23]. Therefore, such evaluation results were presented to PadovA21 Forum in 2004, to be shared and discussed in plenary session. 4.3. Performance indicators definition criteria The goal of performance indicators is to verify the performance improvement in time, taking into account the goals previously set. Transferring them to a LA21 process, performance indicators result the more significant, the more they prove eligible to verify the effectiveness of the efforts fulfilled by the community in time, in order to make operative the development strategies formalized in the Local Action Plan. So, differently from the context indicators, to be able to measure the achieved results and improvements on urban sustainability, performance indicators must be consistent with the actions established in the planning phase. Therefore, the criteria that support the choice of the performance indicators, does not correspond to the data availability neither to the nationally and internally effectiveness of the tools (these are fundamental components in the next definition of indicators). In the preliminary phase of the choice of the performance indicators, Forum plays a determinant role because it represents the local community and is able to highlight, by a democratic process, the opinions and the needs shared. In fact, it is not to underestimate the strategic role indicators are assuming as synthesis of complex informations: the choice of a certain indicator, rather than other, always mirrors trials on the merits that the community has to share [7]. To answer to these needs, for Padua Municipality, the definition of the performance indicators has been entrusted to LA21 Forum. Into the dynamic of shared and participated choices, it was possible to discuss and design more suitable indicators, as deemed by the local community, in order to

A. Scipioni et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1247e1257

measure the fulfilment and the effectiveness of the defined actions. PadovA21 Project, thanks to its operative structure, made this experimentation possible and allowed the formulation of a series of performance indicators, chosen to be coherent with PadovA21 Local Action Plan and derived from the participative process within the Forum. 4.4. Choice of performance indicators for Padua In ‘‘PadovA21’’ Project, the Forum, officially set up at the end of 2002, was one of the fundamental step by which the process had been developed. This led the local community to the definition of a Local Action Plan [31,41]. Particularly, one of the tasks of ‘‘PadovA21’’ Forum, was to design and test a suitable sustainability evaluation system, able to monitor the plans implementation and to assess the results achieved. To fulfill this purpose, in 2003 a working group minor to the ‘‘PadovA21’’ Forum was set up. This, working in accordance with the principles of participation, committed the choice of effective indicators in order to better describe the economical, social and environmental sustainability of Padua in time and to assess the effectiveness of the planned actions and to drive the policies of future intervention. The activity on indicators, carried out by the working group between 2003 and 2004, led to define a list of 61 indicators, divided in four thematic areas (environment, economic, society, health-justice), coherent with scenarios and actions simultaneously outlined in ‘‘PadovA21’’ Forum [31]. All the indicators chosen by the working group were presented in plenary session to the ‘‘PadovA21’’ Forum, which discussed on it and acknowledged its validity. Indicators resulted coherent with activity of ‘‘PadovA21’’ Local Action Plan and satisfied the methodological and operative established requirements. That is why the Forum, with sharing, decided to adopt all the 61 performance indicators proposed by the working group, aimed at monitoring the fulfilment of the undertaken plans and verifying the effectiveness of the actions embarked. Therefore, the ‘‘PadovA21’’ Forum charged the working group with the job of applying, as an experiment, all the performance indicators defined using data and information related to previous years, in order to verify the capability of every indicator in measuring the sustainability improvement in accordance with the objectives established in the Local Action Plan of Padua Municipality [31]. This experimentation is actually in progress: the results will permit the Forum to verify the significance of every indicator and also to keep the fulfilment and effectiveness of the defined plan under control. 5. Discussion 5.1. Methodological reference to analyse and discuss the results obtained within the research In order to analyse the results obtained by the research two principal lines were followed. In fact, the results it can be read

1253

and discussed on the basis of the capability of the tools chosen to measure the urban sustainability, but also on the basis of their capability to create sharing and participation in promoting within the Local Agenda 21 routes. An evaluation tool to measure urban sustainability is effective if it is able to [42]: - describe condition of a certain situation, indicate direction that situation is assuming in the years and clarify casual relationship existing among different characteristics describing situation and/or direction (significance, sensibility, comparability); - communicate the meaning of the evaluations and create sharing on the informations transmitted and their meaning (synthesis, simplicity, clearness, understanding); - provide continuous, concrete and significant information in time, to support decisional process in a structuring way (feasibility, timeliness, continuity). An evaluation tool supporting the Agenda 21 process, is useful if it is able to support at least one of the actions that characterize the carrying out of such a process [26]: - description and analysis of environmental, social and economical needs in the reference context; - sharing of sustainability conditions and performance and sharing of connected intervention priorities; - planning of intervention, with a multi-sector approach and a middleelong term vision; - monitoring of the fulfilment of the plans and auditing of the effectiveness of the undertaken actions. 5.2. Discussion about context indicators The adoption of context indicators, whose validity is nationally and internationally confirmed, and the use of the information available, allowed Padua Municipality to obtain a clear and well developed picture of the level of sustainability of its own city. Another strength of this experience is the transparency with which the informations were used. Context indicators used for Padua have proved that is possible to reach the urban sustainability knowledge through a clear way. Moreover, transparency in using information and in describing results, promotes the sharing, in the LA21 Forum, where the knowledge of investigated problems is not uniform among participants and the language has to be decoded in order that evaluations are understood and not misunderstood. However, the difficulty to knowledge and share such a high number of informations, is a factor that has to be highlighted. In fact, the 70 context indicators, although they are represented by elementary graphs, request a long observation and analysis period and having overall view is not that easy. Certainly, the subdivision of the indicators into eight thematic groups, makes the approach easier and partially simplifies the analysis. However, Padua experience proves how the availability of informations, relevant to

1254

A. Scipioni et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1247e1257

many different aspects of sustainability, although it answers to the complexity of the analysed object, does not help in doing a synthesis. To answer this issue, it is necessary to find tools that allow a synthesis without loosing the abundance and variety of the informations.

application (in process), also the adoption of tools that help synthesis and communication, becomes a strength in monitoring performances, because of its effectiveness, if it maintains itself active in middleelong term and demonstrates itself to be incisive for all the community.

5.3. Discussion about performance indicators

5.4. Formulation of new theoretical reference model from research results

The definition of performance indicators, within PadovA21 Project, is a winning solution: in fact it is able to intrinsically guarantee the consistency with the improvements plans established by LA21 process, because it is the Forum itself that defined the Local Action Plan and got involved in the choice of performance indicators. Moreover, the formulation of performance indicators thanks to dedicated group within the civic Forum, is the premise for an effective and continuous monitoring: democratic logic from which the choice indicators emerged by, is synonym of a shared view and, consequently, presupposes the agreement among different stakeholders, obtained within a participative process that requests comparison and leads to the best compromise choice. Moreover, as emerge from their experimental

Discussing on the ISO 14031 standard capability to lead LA21 process, it emerges that the combined adoption of tools permits to realise an evaluation process supporting an urban route towards sustainability. From the results of the research, it is possible to outline new theoretical model that integrates different needs in measuring the urban sustainability in LA21 process, by putting forward the experimental solutions in the present research. Fig. 3 schematizes this model, drawing origin by theoretical reference model formalized to conduct the research (reported in precedent Fig. 2). Fig. 3 is composed of two parts: upside it schematizes the measuring tools supporting the sustainability, while downside

Fig. 3. The measurement of local sustainability: tools and process. Source: authors elaboration.

A. Scipioni et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1247e1257

it refers to the measurement of sustainability as a continuous process in time. In the first part of Fig. 3, the model suggests to consider, in LA21 process, two different moments, corresponding to different needs of information. The analysis and planning phases request informations on the starting conditions of the process: these informations needs, may be satisfied by context indicators, formulated according to the indications of the ISO 14031 standard, with reference to the indicators commonly adopted in literature in order to evaluate the urban context sustainability. In this phase, the role of the Forum is essentially to share informations, contained in context indicators, and than to recognise the intervention priority and to establish objectives, goals and actions. The get into action phase requires essentially measurement tools able to monitor the actions realised and their effectiveness in fulfilling the objectives planned: these informations needs to be satisfied by suitable performance indicators, formulated in accordance with the indications of the ISO 14031 standard and consistent with the objectives and actions defined. The performance indicators, derived from discussions and comparisons in the civic Forum, become the tools to monitor the fulfilment of its own plans and the results gradually reached in time, also assessing the opportunity of possible corrective interventions. In the second part, Fig. 3 refers to measurement as process of informations management. The adoption of the methodology suggested by ISO 14031 standard is absolutely consistent with the fulfilment and the management of the LA21 process and the cycle ‘‘plan, do, check, act’’ on which the continuous improvement of ISO 14031 standard is developed, and demonstrates an effective answer to the different measurement needs that are peculiar to an LA21. To reach the context knowledge, the civic Forum, needs of informations that allow to guide the planning of the interventions; for this reason the indicators must be formulated and used as a planning tools (‘‘plan’’ phase in ISO 14031 cycle). Meanwhile, to formulate solutions of effective interventions, local community needs of analysis and synthesis tools able to verify the correctness and the adequacy of the plans defined; for this reason, indicators assume the role of check tools and conduct the fulfilment phase of the plans established (‘‘do’’ phase in ISO 14031 cycle). During the implementation of the intervention programmes defined, the Forum needs of informations allow to verify the adequacy of the actions conducted and their effectiveness in reaching the objectives established towards improvement; therefore, indicators have the function to evaluate the Local Action Plan performances in order to guide the LA21 process to a review aimed at hitting even more ambitious objectives in the future (‘‘check and act’’ phase in ISO 14031 cycle). 6. Conclusions The attempt to propose new economical development model, together with the will to define a methodology able to make compatible the economical progress, the environmental

1255

balances of the ecosystem and the human and social promotion of individuals, finds today its paradigm in the sustainable development. In the international debate concerning this theme and its carrying out in an urban context, particular attention is turned to the necessity of defining suitable measurement tools. In general an indicator, to be a valid evaluation tool, has to be able to conduct the analysis process into taking effective decisions, on the basis of objective and exhaustive informations. This is valid for sustainability indicators too. Moreover, from the point of view of the sustainable development and the participated decisions, an indicator is valid if it permits citizens to knowledge and to understand the situation as economical, social and environmental critical issues connected to development, then to comment, share or modify political choices. Actually, just a few indicators are communicated to the citizens. However, the complexity of the decisional process towards sustainability in a long-term period needs the support of a complete tools, able to deal with multidimensional basic themes with an integrate approach. The reference model experimented by Padua Municipality used to evaluate the local sustainable development, is built in analogy with ISO 14031 standard and seems to answer positive to the emerging gaps in literature with reference to the process of sustainability measurement in an urban context. The context indicators allow a general description, also mutual to other similar contexts and so they make possible the comparison in the space. Performance indicators instead, permit to keep under control some particular aspects determining the sustainable development process of each local context; they have the role to evaluate sustainability in time, following criteria that can be unique and not repeatable in other context, because they are specific of the local context involved. The opportunity to identify tools that concretely help in conveying the complex sustainability evaluation into indicators consistent with the uniqueness of the Local Action Plan defined by each local community, becomes possible thanks to the adoption of performance indicators. The performance indicators are associated with the Local Action Plan: their job is to measure sustainable performances in function of carried out actions, for this reason they have to be considered as answer indicators. At the same time, it will not give up using indicators recognized on an international level as effective tools to monitor urban life quality ‘‘in continuum’’: in fact context indicators permit to local contexts to knowledge their own sustainability and to compare themselves in time and space by a general evaluations that overcome the local viewpoint in order to reach a more general perspective. Context indicators inform about situation characterizing the local context: their job is to measure the sustainability performances of the economical, the environmental and the social reference context, regardless of the carried out actions. That is why they have to be considered as state indicators. At last, the difficulty to bring evaluations near the decisional and participative process, typical of an LA21, is surpassed by the chance to define performance indicators

1256

A. Scipioni et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1247e1257

resulting to be the more effective the more they derive from the Forum discussion. Thus, evaluation really becomes a tool that supports LA21 process. Community becomes active protagonist of sustainable development, carrying out above all the subsidiary principle, and then participation principle. Starting from the experience conducted by Padua Municipality, but assuming general validity, the conclusions reached by the present research can be expressed by two conclusive propositions. In first place, ISO 14031 standard results transferable to urban context, because: - the methodology suggested by the standard and its requirements are adaptable to the measurement exigencies, typical of an urban context; - the standard application promises to obtain significant and comparable results in time. In second place, ISO 14031 standard adoption is transferable to the Local Agenda 21 process, because: - it promotes analysis and sharing of conducted evaluations; - it is coherent with informations exigencies and with participative process typical of local sustainability. Grounding on these results, it is possible to identify some further sectors of research development. By following researches it can be interesting to deepen the adoption of tools that help the synthesis and the communication of the evaluations obtained through the use of the context and performance indicators. In particular, it becomes interesting to experiment aggregated indexes diffused in literature, to integrate the different informations that result by the use of numerous context and performance indicators. They describe the local sustainability complexity, but are difficult to synthesize (for example, index as Ecological Footprint to synthesize context indicators and index as Dashboard of Sustainability to synthesize performance indicator). Another interesting research direction, that comes out from the results of this work, is the audit of the transferability of this experimented tools and of the methodology defined in the evaluation of the local sustainability, also in other contexts (for example, in other urban context with different characteristics, but also different local context as little groups of Municipality, or similar urban context with a more mature LA21 process). In particular, it becomes interesting to verify the validity of theoretical reference model (presented in Fig. 2), formulated to manage the measurement of the urban sustainability by effective tools (context and performance indicators) and by an effective process (the continuous improvement of ISO 14031 standard). Finally, the research conducted foresees the chance of using continuous improvement model of ISO 14031 standard as reference for the interpretation and use of the other evaluation models of sustainability that are diffused in literature. For example, it can be interesting to verify in which way the evaluation process, understood as ‘‘plan, do check,

act’’ cycle, can support the application of models as PSR or DPSIR, leading to the definition of indicators that show different and subsidiary aspects of sustainability, not only environment, of the local context within processes more and more binding.

References [1] Munasinghe M, McNeely J. Key concepts and terminology of sustainable development. In: Munasinghe M, Shearer W, editors. Defining and measuring sustainability: the biogeophysical foundations. Washington DC: The World Bank; 1995. p. 19e56. [2] United Nations. Agenda 21. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: United Nations conference on environment and development (UNCED), UN General Assembly; 1992. [3] United Nations. Rio declaration on environment and development. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: United nations conference on environment and development (UNCED), UN General Assembly; 1992. [4] European Commission. Decision no. 1600/2002/EC of the European parliament and of the council of 22 July 2002 laying down the sixth community environment action programme ‘‘Environment 2010: our future, our choice’’. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission; 2002. [5] Organization for the Economic Cooperation and Development. Towards sustainable development: environmental indicators. Paris, France: OECD; 1998. [6] Morrison-Saunders A, Bailey J. Practitioners perspectives on the role of science in environmental impact assessment. Environmental Management 2003;31(6):683e95. [7] Yuan W, James P, Hodgson K, Hutchinson SM, Shi C. Development of sustainability indicators by communities in China: a case study of Chongming County, Shanghai. Journal of Environmental Management 2003;68:253e61. [8] Kartena K. Ecological value added in an integrated ecosystemeeconomy model. An indicator for sustainability. Ecological Economics 2004;48: 189e200. [9] Hanley N, Moffatt I, Faichney R, Wilson M. Measuring sustainability: a time series of alternative indicators for Scotland. Ecological Economics 1999;28:55e73. [10] European Commission. European sustainable cities, export group on the urban environment, EC e DG XI ‘‘Environment, nuclear safety & civil protection’’. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission; 1996. [11] Lintott J. Environmental accounting: useful to whom and for what? Ecological Economics 1996;16:179e90. [12] Hukkinen J. From groundless universalism to grounded generalism: improving ecological economic indicators of humaneenvironmental interaction. Ecological Economics 2003;44:11e27. [13] International Organization for Standardization. ISO14031 e environmental management: environmental performance evaluation e guidelines. ISO14031:1999(E). 1st ed. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO; 1999. [14] Lee Kuhre W. ISO14031 environmental performance evaluation (EPE). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1998. [15] European Commission. Regulation (EEC) no. 761/2001 of 19 March 2001 allowing voluntary participation by organisations in a community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS). Brussels, Belgium: European Commission; 2002. European Parliament and Council. [16] International Organization for Standardization. ISO14001 e environmental management systems: specification with guidance for use. ISO14001:1996(E). 1st ed. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO; 1996. [17] Borlenghi R. Guida alle norme ISO 14000. [ISO 14000 standards guide]. Milano, Italy: Hoepli; 2000. [18] International Organization for Standardization. ISO14001 e environmental management systems: specification with guidance for use. ISO14001:2004(E). 2nd ed. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO; 2004. [19] Jasch C. Environmental performance evaluation and indicators. Journal of Cleaner Production 2000;8:79e88.

A. Scipioni et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1247e1257 [20] Wathey D, O’Reilly M. ISO14031: a practical guide to developing environment performance indicators for your business. Corporate Environmental Strategy 2002;9(2):206e7. [21] Olsthoorn X, Tyteca D, Wehrmeyer W, Wagner M. Environmental indicators for business: a review of the literature and standardisation methods. Journal of Cleaner Production 2001;9:453e63. [22] Walter G. Economics, ecology-based communities, and sustainability. Ecological Economics 2002;42:81e7. [23] Corbetta PG. Metodologia e Tecniche della Ricerca Sociale. [Methodology and methods of the social research]. Bologna, Italy: II Mulino; 1999. [24] O’Reilly M, Wathey D, Gelber M. ISO14031: effective mechanism to environmental performance evaluation. Corporate Environmental Strategy 2000;7:267e75. [25] International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives. Charter of European cities & towns towards sustainability e the Aalborg charter. Aalborg, Denmark: ICLEI; 1994. [26] International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives. European local agenda 21 planning guide e how to engage in long-term environmental action planning towards sustainability?. Freiburg, Germany: ICLEI publication e Policy & Practice Series; 1995. ICLEI European Secretariat. [27] Toni F. Misurare la sostenibilita`. [To measure the sustainability]. In: Gruppo indicatori ISSI, editor. Un futuro sostenibile per l’Italia; Rapporto ISSI 2002 (A sustainable future for Italy; ISSI report 2002). Roma, Italy: Editori Riuniti; 2002. p. 19e50. [28] McCool SF, Stankey JH. Indicators of sustainability: challenges and opportunities at the interface of science and policy. Environmental Management 2004;33(3):294e305. [29] Comune di Padova. Bando per il finanziamento di programmi di sviluppo sostenibile e di attuazione di Agenda 21 Locale e Approvazione del progetto ‘‘Padova sostenibile’’ (Call for funds for sustainable development programs and Local Agenda 21 actions e Approval of project ‘‘Sustainable Padua’’), Comune di Padova, Padova, Deliberazione di Giunta Comunale n. 70; febraury, 20, 2001. [30] Comune di Padova. Determinazione del capo settore Pianificazione Urbanistica e Ambiente no. 690115/2001 del 14 novembre 2001. [Statement of the urban and environmental plan chief no. 690115/2001, 14 November 2001]. Padova, Italy: Comune di Padova; 2001. [31] Comune di Padova. Progetto Agenda 21 Locale: ‘‘Padova Sostenibile, PadovA21’’. [Local Agenda 21 project: ‘‘sustainable Padua, PadovA21]. Padova, Italy: Comune di Padova e Assessorato Ambiente, Settore Pianificazione Urbanistica Ambiente, Servizio Ambiente; 2001. [32] Comune di Padova. Piano d’Azione Locale del Comune di Padova. [Local action plan of the Padua municipality]. Padova, Italy: Comune di Padova; 2003. [33] Scipioni A, Mazzi A, Arena F, Fornasiero L. Aggregated indexes to measure urban sustainability. The experience of Padua Municipality: a Quality of Life Observatory. In Workshop papers of the ‘‘Workshop III EU Thematic Network project Regionet, Evaluation for Regional Sustainable Development’’. University of Manchester, Manchester with Centre for Urban & Regional Ecology (CURE), The Interdisciplinary Centre for

[34] [35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

1257

Comparative Research in the Social Sciences (ICCR IFS CIR), Thematic Network REGIONET, European Commission 5th Framework Programme, 2003: Theme1 papers, Theme1_mazzi. World Health Organization. Healthy cities and urban governance. WHO e Regional Office for Europe; 1998. Comune di Padova. Profilo della Salute della Citta`. [City health profile]. Padova, Italy: Comune di Padova e Progetto Citta` Sane, Settore Gabinetto del Sindaco; 1998. Ambiente Italia. Rapporto Legambiente: Ecosistema Urbano 2003, IX rapporto sulla qualita` ambientale dei Comuni Capoluogo. [Legambiente report: urban ecosystem 2003, environmental quality 9th report]. Milano, Italy: Edizioni LAB Italia; 2002. Cadeo R, Del Giudice R, Silva E, Vaghi C. Indagine sulla vivibilita` delle Province italiane, Dossier. [Survey on quality of live in Italian cities, Dossier]. Milano, Italy: II Sole 24 Ore del lunedı`; 2002. ISTAT. DEMOS, Sistema di Indicatori Sociali. [DEMOS, system of social indicators]. Roma, Italy: ISTAT e Departments of Social Statistics; 2001. Scipioni A, Mazzi A. Osservatorio sulla Qualita` della Vita a Padova, Manuale degli Indicatori. [Observatory on the quality of life in Padua. The indicators handbook]. Padova, Italy: Universita` degli Studi di Padova e Centro Studi Qualita` Ambiente and Comune di Padova e Settore Ambiente; 2003. Centro Studi Qualita` Ambiente. La Qualita` della Vita a Padova: Manuale degli Indicatori. [Quality of life in Padua: the indicators handbook]. Padova, Italy: Comune di Padova, ; 2003. Comune di Padova. Regolamento del Forum Agenda 21 Locale del Comune di Padova. [Rules of local agenda 21 forum in Padua Municipalita`]. Padova, Italy: Comune di Padova, ; 2001. Bossel H. Indicators for sustainable development: theory, method, applications, A report to the Balaton group. Ottawa, Canada: IISD Publications Centre; 1999.

Antonio Scipioni: Professor of the Faculty of Engineering at the University of Padua, Member of the Accreditation Commitee of SINCERT, Headmaster of Centro Studi Qualita` e Ambiente, Headmaster of the local and sustainable development master course. Anna Mazzi: PhD in Management Engineering, titular of a research grant, sustainable development expert. Filippo Zuliani: titular of a research grant, Environmental Management System and Performance Indicators expert. Marco Mason: expert of data communication management system, bibliography research and environmental applied statistic.