Indicator assessment
Two ways were used in ECASA to assess the validity and appropriateness of the indicators proposed by partners.
First stage
Each indicator was evaluated on general aspects from A (excellent) to E (very poor) for the following criteria:
Direct relevance to objectives
The indicator selection must be closely linked to the requirements of the EU for use in environmental impact assessments and site selection.
Clarity in design
It is important that the selected indicators are defined clearly in order to avoid confusion in their development or interpretation.
Realistic collection or development costs
Indicators must be practical and realistic and their cost of collection and development therefore need to be considered. This may lead to trade-offs between the information content of various indicators and the cost of collecting them.
High quality and reliability
Indicators and the information they provide are only as good as the data from which they are derived.
Appropriate spatial and temporal scale
Careful thought should be given to the appropriate spatial and temporal scale of indicators.
Obvious significance
The meaning and usefulness of the indicator should easily be understood by stakeholders, e.g. they would prefer to use dissolved oxygen levels rather than sulphide concentrations.
Second stage
Indicators were tested in the field at operational sites with different species and environments. The results of the field tests was the core information used for the final approval of the list of indicators, after consultation with stakeholders.
Click on the following links for more detail:
ECASA methodology for the selection of indicators
Indicator assessment
