About Pearl - Printer friendly
The objective of PEARL (Prototype Environmental Assessment and Reporting Landscape) is to provide governments and the international community with a comprehensive overview from both a thematic and geographic perspective of the various environmental assessments completed or being undertaken globally. This web-based system is freely available on the internet (www.unep.org/pearl) to all interested stakeholders. It serves as a tool to provide timely, relevant, reliable and targeted information on what is being done by various institutions to keep the global environmental situation under continuous review.


Background

One of UNEP’s main functions since its inception at the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment in 1972 is to keep under review the world environmental situation, as mandated by UN General Assembly resolution 2997 (XXVII). The objective being to ensure that emerging environmental problems of wide international significance receive appropriate and adequate considerations by Governments. The increasing complexity of environmental degradation now requires an enhanced capacity for scientific assessment, monitoring and early warning. For this reason UNEP’s Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum (GC/GMEF) has initiated a consultative process to identify gaps and needs in the current assessment structure, and the means to address them. In the latter half of 2003 the Executive Director initiated a consultative process with governments, inter-governmental organizations (IGOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and scientific institutions (SIs) on ways and means to strengthen the scientific base of UNEP. This ongoing multi-stakeholder consultative process is referred to as the Science Initiative and a description of the process to date is available at "http://www.unep.org/scienceinitiative" . The first intergovernmental consultation on Strengthening the Scientific Base of UNEP was held on 14-15 January 2004.


Outcome of the intergovernmental consultation 14-15 January 2004

The intergovernmental consultation produced a number of key findings and it was suggested that UNEP could provide an umbrella for coordination by providing periodic stock of ongoing environmental assessment activities, while avoiding duplicating or interfering with existing mechanisms where those were working well. The consultation highlighted the following questions to be answered:

1.Coverage:
  • What does the “assessment landscape” look like, i.e.
  • what assessments are under way and their geographic coverage?
  • of what? (thematic coverage)
  • by whom? (organizations, institutions and partners involved),
  • for what purpose? (goal, scope and mandate)

2. Effectiveness: This area draws on the work carried out at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University such as the Global Environmental Assessment (GEA) Project.(URL -http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/gea/index.html. Are these assessments effective i.e. are they salient (relevant to decision-makers needs), scientifically credible and do they have legitimacy amongst the various stakeholder groups?

3. Impacts: Are these assessments having an impact and making a difference, i.e. positively influencing environmental policy making and implementation, human behavior and/or the state of the environment?

Objectives of Mapping the Assessment Landscape
The two main objectives of the exercise are:
  • To provide a definitive baseline overview of the thematic and geographic coverage of and scope   of  the assessment at all levels (global, regional, sub-regional and national)
  • To identify the gaps in information to assist in setting assessment priorities e.g. addressing the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) Plan of Implementation.

Scope of the task
UNEP was asked to undertake a “mapping of the assessment landscape” by examining various framework assessment processes, sub-processes, individual assessments and their related outputs. For example, the Global Environment Outlook (GEO) is an example of a global assessment process that has been led by UNEP and has evolved into many sub-processes at regional, sub-regional, national and city level (GEO-LAC, Africa Environment Outlook sub-process {AEO}, GEO for Cities, etc) and individual assessments (GEO-1, GEO-3, AEO-1). The Global International Waters Assessment (GIWA) is another example of a framework assessment process but one that was designed in a top-down manner with 66 sub-processes covering all water related regions of the world.

After an initial examination of several global, regional, thematic and national assessment processes, the following conceptual model was deemed to be the most suitable for describing the complexity of the assessment landscape worldwide. It is a simple hierarchical model whereby a lead institution (or institutions) is responsible for driving and managing an overall assessment process which in turn is comprised of one or more sub-processes under which individual assessments are undertaken, ultimately producing various published outputs. Published outputs are usually the main assessment report and a number of related reports such as executive summaries, technical studies, data compendia and policy-relevant findings.

Conceptual model

Fig. 1 Conceptual (hierarchical) model for mapping the assessment landscape

Four different metadata forms are used in capturing the essential data with respect to the assessment processes, sub-processes, individual assessments and published outputs. These forms follow the Dublin Core metadata standards. Each form has a help file describing the type of data to be entered into each field. Samples of completed forms for one aspect of the Global International Waters Assessment (GIWA) are available for users to consult. Institutional information is provided by the Environment Directory, which is linked with PEARL. Assessments are undertaken in response to various mandates. It was thus found useful to link a mandate database with PEARL in order to provide information regarding the various mandates that are driving various assessments and related processes.


The global and regional assessment landscape

The complexity of the global assessment landscape is partly illustrated in the following snapshot that shows processes driven primarily by UNEP.

Processes in the global assessment landscape

Fig. 2 Processes in the global assessment landscape

The diagram also serves as the basic conceptual data model for the web-based system called PEARL (Prototype Environmental Assessment and Reporting Landscape) designed as a repository for information on framework assessment processes, individual assessments and their related outputs. UNEP’s Division of Early Warning and Assessment (DEWA) is currently mapping the assessment landscape at the global and regional levels where a number of important processes have been undertaken by UNEP or are currently being undertaken by UNEP either alone or in collaboration with other partners. In addition, a number of national-level assessment outputs have been identified via the web or through UNEP’s collection of assessment reports from various countries. These reports are mainly national SOE reports (all countries were required to present an SOE report to UNCED in 1992) but some are thematic while a few are city and district SOE reports. UNEP/DEWA has also been involved with a number of national and sub-national assessments.


National assessment landscape

Mapping the assessment landscape at the national level entails identifying and compiling information about the overall process and sub-processes in place to keep the national environmental situation under review. In addition there are geographic and thematic aspects to take into consideration. Individual assessments may be focused on thematic issues such as water quality, air quality and biodiversity or they could be integrated assessments undertaken at the national (country-wide) or sub-national level. Sub-national refers to provinces, states, districts, municipalities or cities within a country. Thematic assessments could also be undertaken at the sub-national level. Furthermore, all these assessments may be undertaken on either an ad hoc or periodic basis in response to various legal mandates. Individual assessments may produce a variety of different outputs (reports, studies etc.). Different institutions may be involved in undertaking the assessments although, presumably, the principal national environmental authority would have oversight of the entire assessment landscape at the national level. An initial examination of national level processes and sub-processes in place in a number of countries (e.g. Australia, Indonesia, South Africa, Uganda, USA) to keep the national environmental situation under review suggests that two distinct classes of environmental assessment activities can be identified:
  • activities that are country-wide and may cover one theme or multiple themes e.g. the national SOE assessment process or the national biodiversity assessment process
  • activities that are carried out at the sub-national level e.g. a city SOE assessment or a water quality assessment for a certain region within the country. Such activities may be stand-alone i.e. not well integrated with the overall, country-wide environmental review process.
The following generic model provides a snapshot of a typical national-level assessment landscape:

Generic processes in the typical national assessment landscape

Fig. 3 Generic processes in the typical national assessment landscape

UNEP/DEWA is planning to work with governments before undertaking a comprehensive mapping of the assessment landscape at a national level in the respective countries. However, before undertaking the exercise, UNEP/DEWA proposes to carry out a number of country pilot studies starting early in 2006. More country pilots will be undertaken in 2007.


National activities and outputs

For each country selected for the pilots, the following tasks will be undertaken:
  • A review of the overall assessment framework in place to keep the environment of the country under continuous review. An updated version of the diagram shown in Fig. 3 above will be produced (without reference to specific published outputs). The details of the overall assessment framework will be recorded on the respective metadata forms describing the assessment process, assessment sub-process and individual assessment.
  • An inventory of published assessment outputs at the national and sub-national levels using the metadata form for published outputs.
Upon completion of both tasks it may be necessary to organize a national stakeholder consultation to consider gaps identified in the review process and to examine ways to improve SOE reporting in the future. This exercise will be linked with the implementation of the Bali Strategic Plan for Technology Support and Capacity Building.

Mapping the assessment landscape for each country will provide a definitive overview of the assessment framework in place to keep the national environment under continuous review, making it easy to disseminate information to the decision-makers, policy formulators and the community so as to increase their knowledge and understanding of the thematic and geographic coverage of the assessment process, highlight the overlaps and gaps in the assessments and provide an indication of the assessment’s effectiveness and impact(s) and how these could be assessed and improved upon in subsequent assessments undertaken in the country.


Structure, management and operation of PEARL

UNEP/DEWA is responsible for the overall management of PEARL. The system is comprised of five modules:
  • Mandate database describing various mandates endorsed by the Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum of UNEP, the United Nations General Assembly and various other decision-making fora such as the African Ministerial Conference on Environment (AMCEN). The mandate database may be browsed directly at URL
  • Data entry module with restricted access for UNEP staff and staff in partner institutions that have agreed to provide metadata to PEARL on assessment processes, sub-processes, individual assessments and published outputs. A userid and password is required from the PEARL system administrator.
  • Browse module to enable internet users to browse through the information available in the system and view different aspects of the assessment landscape. 
  • Search module to enable users to query the system by conducting simple and advanced searches on PEARL. The search function is more powerful than the browse function in that complex queries can be formulated to extract value added information not immediately visible under the browse module.
  • Report module to enable users to view reports based on the search results of popular queries. A number of visualization tools will enable users to import search results into other applications (including GIS applications) and view different aspects of the assessment landscape using maps, charts and diagrams.
Go To Page    1    2    3     4    5     Printer Friendly