Revision and finalisation of streamlining proposals

Transcription

1 Revision and finalisation of streamlining proposals The streamline exercise will be applied at all steps of the indicator production process. The fundamental principles underpinning the streamline exercise will be 1. to review and analyse the data flows needed to underpin indicator production, 2. to show if there is multi-purpose use of the same indicators in many reports or if there is policy synergies with streamlining potentials, 3. to identify institutional responsibilities. To do so, two steps and a methodological example are presented below. Step 1. Analysis of all steps of the indicator production process. It is proposed to extract some of the information from the fact sheets to put it in an xls file and get an overview of all steps of the indicator production process (see two excel files attached, one empty and the other one with a practical example). Indicator dimensions Indicator code Sub-Indicator code (internal) Sub-indicator name Data source Data owner Responsible of data treatment Data units Data quality Indicator owner Publication Units Geographical aggregate Sector coverage Temporal coverage Breakdown 1: Substances Breakdown 2: Other data source used to calculate the indicator Policy question Policy target Interpretation In order to make streamlining proposals as follows: Indicator code and sub-indicator code and name Given the complexity of some indicators (for example, some indicators of the EEA which are called core indicators are actually an aggregation of several sub-indicators that have all their specificity), information might need to be disaggregated in different sub-indicators (see example). A NA (not applicable) should be used whenever an indicator code does not refer to multiple sub-indicators. Data source and Data quality Where different data sources are used for similar indicators, the streamline exercise will propose to choose the same data (the most prominent and robust and best suited for purpose = the best data quality ) as basis for all indicators, or integrate the data (shared data basis). Data quality will be 1

2 assessed and justified comparing the relative data quality of all data sources and classifying them in good, average or low. Data dimensions (units and time-series) How the raw data is available provides an indication of their potential use. Indicator dimensions (Data aggregation/indicator presentation) The units and the factors used for aggregating data (e.g. Greenhouse Gas warming potentials) and the temporal coverage will be analysed. This refers to the units and the uniformity of measurement (it will thus prevent that, for example, energy data be presented in GigaJoules in one indicator as well as BTUs, Therms or kwhrs in other indicators) as well as the uniformity of the trajectories presented (this will prevent that, for example, the same indicator be presented from 1990 or 1995 or 2000 to date). The aggregation level (a sector, an area, a region, a country ) should also be analysed in-depth. For example, collecting fossil-fuel input and CO2 output for the energy sector is merely an indication of its relative efficiency and production volume, which suggests focusing on one indicator alone. In other words, if the input-output conversion shows little diversity, having both indicators on input as well as output data is unnecessary. Another example will be the assessment of indicators concerning new commitments (e.g. is there a need to keep one indicator for EU15 and another one for EU27?). The need to present the indicator in both absolute values and in index will also be assessed. Combination of these data with other data sets The combination of these data with other data sets (ex. using data as denominator or using normalising factors) should be analysed. If different indicators are using similar values (ex. Value added and turnover) with the aim to present the same type of information, the process of streamlining will define the more prominent and robust denominator. Publication of the indicator, Policy question, Policy target, Interpretation of the indicator (assessment) Publication of the indicator and Interpretation of the indicator (assessment) will show if there is multi-purpose use of the same indicators in many reports. Policy question and Policy target will show if there are substantial synergies between different policy objectives. These items analysed together will show if there is potential to streamline policy-relevant indicators that can serve several policy objectives simultaneously. Data owner(s), Responsible of data treatment (data processor = indicator production from raw data) and Indicator owner(s) By separating data sources from subsequent stages in the data manipulation from raw data to environmental information, including data treatment (e.g. aggregation, standardisation, data gapfilling, modelisation, etc), the indicator generation (with the respective indicator owners) is also separated from the data treatment (with the correspondent data processor) and the data collection (with the correspondent data owner) and responsibilities and roles clarified. It is also very important to economise the indicators production process by fully sharing indicators and establishing clear responsibilities and roles in the data collection, treatment, management and assessment processes. Indicators relevant to more than one theme/sector will not be repeated in the different sets so indicators will be shared. The streamline proposals will also be applied at the institutional level in order to optimise institutional co-operation at the EU level, so that information needs, responsibilities and roles are mapped and clarified and duplication is avoided. 2

3 Step 2. To illustrate the entire data-flow in the indicator production process (e.g. the following flowchart) in order to identify institutional responsibilities and roles. Data sources Data compiler Responsible? (will be the data owner) Raw data publication Responsible? Data processor (gap-fillling, modelisation, etc) Responsible? Data sets (indicator) dissemination Responsible? (will be the indicator owner) Data Breakdown Indicators publication List here the different publications of the indicator (e.g. Annual web publication of CSI (EEA), Annual Directive Status Report (DG Environment), Biannual monitoring report of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy (Eurostat), etc). It is important that institutional responsibilities for data collection are clearly delineated and the responsibilities for producing indicators are clear for the respective institutions so that duplication is avoided. In particular, the streamlining proposals should allow the EU organisations, with either a mandate or role to gather data and to produce indicator-based reports and services to work together on a common approach so as to avoid duplication and where there are similar needs, to use the same indicators for many purposes. Where common data are used, a division of tasks between the relevant indicator producers can be proposed and discussed in order to avoid double work, avoid differences in methodologies, and avoid confusion on indicator ownership. This then means that the indicator producers should agree upon, and share production criteria. This activity should facilitate the creation of indicator teams within and between the relevant organisations with different tasks in the indicator production process. At this stage, Eurostat proposes the following: Indicator owner is called the organisation which uses a set of statistical data to define an indicator and publishes it under its responsibility. The data could have been collected by the organisation or taken as such from another source. Data owner is called the organisation which collects statistical data from the EU Member States based on a questionnaire or other methods. It is possible that this organisation produces aggregates or performs other calculations on the data. 3

4 It is usual that the indicator owner and the respective data owner coincide but there are also cases that these two differ. For example, when one organisation uses a data set collected by another to develop an indicator for a specific policy (e.g. data from EEA are used by Eurostat for an SDI indicator published only on the Eurostat website). The indicator profile will state clearly who the indicator owner is and who the data owner is. Contact information for both should be provided in the cases that they do not coincide. The indicator owner will be responsible for the creation of the overall indicator profile whereas the data owner will provide the information regarding i) data collection and their statistical processing and; ii) data quality, accuracy and comparability concepts. The owner should keep the indicator profile up-to-date. This will be made possible with the 'metadata editor' that will be provided by Eurostat. This flowchart should present the streamlining possibilities and the agreed responsibilities ( presumed in the cases of several institutions involved or not assigned institution yet or data center best suited ) and the reasoning behind the different proposals (including illustrations and examples when needed). Stakeholders will be asked to give their views, possible additions and refinements. The overriding objective of the discussions would thus be to develop as far as possible a common set supported by a shared system of relevant environmental data information in which all interested parties would co-operate and play a role. Practical example (this example has been done with two indicators one complex that has 5 sub-indicators CSI 001 and one that has no embedded sub-indicators TSDCC100 - but the analysis will be done with all indicators and sub-indicators under each theme at the same time) 4

5 Indicator code tsdcc100 - Greenhouse gas emissions - Total CSI 001 Emissions of acidifying substances Greenhouse Gas Emissions (in CO2 equivalent) indexed to 1990 CSI CSI CSI CSI CSI NA Sub-Indicator code Change in emissions of sulphur oxides, ammonia and nitrogen Contributions by sector for Emission trends of Sub-indicator name oxides compared with the 2010 emissions of acidifying acidifying pollutants NECD and Gothenburg protocol pollutants targets Data source Data on emissions of air pollutants submitted to the LRTAP Convention and copied to EEA and ETC/ACC Data owner UNECE (LRTAP Convention) Responsible of data ETC/AAC and EEA Data dimensions Gg (1000 t) Data quality Indicator owner Publication Indicator dimensions Units Index (1990 base) % change ( ) Geographic Aggregates: EU27 al aggregate and EEA32 Sector coverage Good EEA EEA web site - every year All sectors of the data % of total emissions in all sectors Change in sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides and ammonia emissions for each sector between 1990 and 2009 % change ( ) Contribution to total change in Sox, Nox, and NH3 emissions for each sector % change ( ) EEA member countries Aggregates:EEA32 Aggregates:EEA32 Aggregates:EEA32 All sectors of the data Energy production and distribution; Energy use in industry;, Industrial processes; Road transport; Non-road transport; Commercial, institutional and households; Solvent and product use; Agriculture; Waste; Other Energy production and distribution; Energy use in industry;, Industrial processes; Road transport; Non-road transport; Commercial, institutional and households; Solvent and product use; Agriculture; Waste; Other Energy production and distribution; Energy use in industry;, Industrial processes; Road transport; Nonroad transport; Commercial, institutional and households; Solvent and product use; Agriculture; Waste; Other Temporal (T-2) coverage (T-2) Breakdown 1: Sox, Nox, NH3 Sox, Nox, NH3 Sox, NH3, Nox Sox, NH3, Nox Sox, NH3, Nox Substances Breakdown 2: Other data source used NA GHG emissions EEA EEA CO2, CH4, N2O in Gg (1000 tonnes). Pollutants: HFCs, PFCs, SF6 in Gg CO2 equivalent. Aggregate: All greenhouse gases in Gg CO2 equivalent. Good Eurostat Eurostat database - yearly Index base year = 100 (1990) EU27 member states, candidate and acceding countries, EFTA countries Aggregates: EU15, EU27 The Kyoto basket of greenhouse gases all agregated in CO2 equivalents 5

6 Policy question Policy target Interpretation Key policy question: What progress is being made in reducing emissions of acidifying pollutants across Europe? - Key policy question: What progress is being made in reducing emissions of acidifying pollutants across Europe? 2010 Gothenburg Protocol target/nec directive Assessment of EEA32 members in relation to Gothenburg Protocol 2010 targets and NEC Directive Specific policy question: Specific policy question: How How do different sectors and do different sectors and processes contribute to processes contribute to emissions of acidifying emissions of acidifying pollutants pollutants Specific policy question: How do different sectors and processes contribute to emissions of acidifying pollutants What progress has been made in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Europe? The EU-15 agreed (Council Decision 2002/358/EC) to a collective 8 % reduction of its greenhouse gas emissions by This agreement sets the contribution of each individual EU-15 Member State towards reaching the common EU Kyoto target. Eastern European Member States have individual targets under the KP, with reduction requirements ranging from 6 % to 8 %. Between 2000 and 2007 EU-15 greenhouse gas emissions have remained above the target path. However, since 2004 emissions have reduced appreciably and are moving towards the target 6

7 Data flow-chart to clarify institutional responsibilities and roles Practical example Proposal of a shared acidifying substances, particulates and ozone precursors information system A single data set called emissions of acidifying substances, particulate and ozone precursors shared as follows: Annual national inventories Data compilers UNECE & DG ENV & UNFCCC Raw data publication Datasets & Eionet (EEA) Data processor (gap-fillling, modelisation, etc) ETC/ACC & EEA Data sets dissemination Eurostat (Eurobase) Presentation by pollutant and by sector in EEA32, EU27, EU15. Indicators publication Annual web publication of CSI (EEA), Annual NEC Directive Status Report (DG Environment), Bi-annual monitoring report of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy (Eurostat) Where: Data owner: UNECE, DG Environment and UNFCCC Data processor: ETC/ACC and EEA Data publication and dissemination: Eionet Central Data Repository and web datasets (EEA): Data as reported by each country (reporting obligations NECD and LRTAP). UNFCCC website: Data as reported by each country Eurostat (Eurobase): Data processed by ETC/ACC and EEA with the following breakdown: Emissions of acidifying substances (total SOx, NOx and NH 3 ) Emissions of ozone precursors (total NOx, NMVOC, CO and CH 4 ) Emissions of fine particles (primary particulate matter) and secondary particulate matter precursors (total PM2.5, PM10, NOX, SO2 and NH3). Emissions of sulphur oxides (SOx) by source sector Emissions of ammonia (NH 3 ), by source sector Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) by source sector 7

8 Emissions of non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOC) by source sector Emissions of CO by source sector Emissions of CH4 by source sector Emissions of PM2.5 by source sector Emissions of PM10 by source sector Indicator owner: EEA Indicator publications: Annual web publication of CSI (EEA), Annual NEC Directive Status Report (DG Environment), Bi-annual monitoring report of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy (Eurostat) Annual NEC Directive Status Report (DG Environment) will take into account the messages published in the Annual web publication of CSI (EEA). Bi-annual monitoring report of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy (Eurostat) will take into account the messages published in the Annual web publication of CSI (EEA) and the Annual NEC Directive Status Report (DG Environment). 8