Análisis de restricciones para reducir los costos de ejecución

orientor subsystem subsystem performance contribution to total system

existence human Children living in poverty Low birthweight infants

support – –

natural – –

effectiveness human Health care expenditures Distribution of personal

income

support Residential water Work required for basic

consumption needs

natural Impervious surfaces Solid waste generated and

recycled

freedom human High school graduation Housing affordability ratio

of action support Real unemployment Voter participation

natural Renewable and Farm acreage

nonrenewable energy use

security human Employment Juvenile crime

concentration

support Community capital Emergency room use

for non-ER purposes

natural Soil erosion Pollution prevention and

renewable resource use

adaptability human Adult literacy Youth involvement in

community service

support Library and community Vehicle miles travelled

centre usage and fuel consumption

natural Biodiversity Wetlands

coexistence human Volunteer involvement Ethnic diversity of teachers

in schools

support Air quality Asthma hospitalization

rate for children

natural Wild salmon Population

psychological human Equity in justice Neighbourliness

needs support Pedestrian friendly streets Perceived quality of life

natural Gardening activity Open space in urban villages

Only two original Seattle indicators were not used in this scheme: public participa- tion in the arts and arts instruction.

Comprehensive indicator systems have been derived by citizen groups in many cities.59_{A famous and often copied example is the set of indicators}

of sustainable development for the city of Seattle, Washington. This set is the result of a long process of discussion and development, involving inten- sive citizen participation, as explained in Sec. 5.5. Table 6 shows this set of indicators in an orientation-theoretic scheme corresponding to Table 4. Remarkably, there is an almost perfect correspondence between the original set and the orientor-based scheme (with the exception of two indicators pertaining to the arts). This seems to indicate that the Seattle indicators are indeed comprehensive, covering all important aspects of basic orientor ful- fillment for viability and sustainability.

As a general rule, indicators will be region-specific, especially here with its ‘wild salmon runs.’ Obviously, the indicator sets for a village in Lapland and a village of similar size in West Africa would be quite different, although overall conclusions concerning the sustainability of each system could again be comparable.

Indicator set for a state: Upper Austria

Indicator sets for sustainable development of small geographic regions will have to reflect specific regional concerns. Using the basic orientor frame- work, a tentative set of 42 indicators for sustainable development has been developed for the federal state of Upper Austria.60

Table 7 presents the provisional indicator set for this state. The set was developed by a working group of about a dozen scientists, planners and government officials from that state in response to an explicit mandate from the state legislature to develop a set of indicators for monitoring progress in the official sustainable development program of the state. The orientor-based approach (Table 4) was used to obtain this set.

The indicator set was developed by the group in a three-day workshop at a remote conference site. The participants had familiarized themselves with the orientor-based approach by reading some introductory materials, roughly equivalent to the present book. However, the systems approach and the basic orientor concepts were new to them, and the first day was spent on identifying the relevant systems, their boundaries, and mutual relation- ships, i.e., the human system, support system, natural system and the total system, and on discussing the meaning of the orientor questions (of Table 4) with respect to these systems.

On the second day, the group split into three working groups, each work- ing on indicators for one of the three subsystems. For each of the seven basic orientors, potential indicators were identified for subsystem perfor- mance, and its contribution to the total system. The corresponding 7x2

matrix was eventually filled by some three to 10 proposed indicators for each slot. Some care was taken at this point to make sure that the proposed indicators could be procured, at least in principle.

The full list of indicators developed by the three working groups was discussed and modified in plenary on the third day. For each of the 42 slots in the scheme, one preferred indicator was identified. Other indicators identified as useful were kept as supplemental indicators. Within a few weeks after the workshop, the list was modified by the workshop organizers, based on additional comments and suggestions submitted by the workshop participants.

Participants connected to the state government’s statistical office then tried to match the indicators as far as possible with existing time series. Obtaining time series data for this indicator set turned out to be more difficult than expected, as most of the information is collected at the national level only. Unfortunately, due to a change in government, the project lost the necessary financial and humanpower support. At the time of this writing, the work has not been com- pleted and the indicator set has not been officially adopted.

Table 7. Compact set of indicators of sustainable development for