Limitations of Environmental Data

Archived Topic Box from the 2003 Third Annual Benchmark Report

Interest in, and concern about, environmental quality has been increasing in North America and Worldwide for decades and will likely continue to grow. Unfortunately, this increased interest and concern has not translated into an interest in comprehensively measuring environmental quality. Many measurements exist but most are narrowly defined and few of them are comparable across sub-national jurisdictions, much less international borders.

A five year project undertaken in the United States provides some useful ideas about how to establish and track comprehensive and comparable environmental measures. "The State of The Nations Ecosystems" identifies ten major characteristics of ecosystem condition and use to provide a balanced description of each of the six ecosystem types identified: Coasts & Oceans, Farmlands, Forests, Fresh Waters, Grasslands & Shrublands and Urban & Suburban Areas. The final framework lists 103 indicators that, taken together, "...provide a rich, yet manageable, view of the state of the nation's [US] ecosystems." While there are data for more than half of these 103 indicators the authors conclude that the data "...do not – individually or collectively – provide a high-level, comprehensive account of the state of the nation's ecosystems."

Environment Canada is pursuing a core set of indicators to "bring together many... ...indicator initiatives to contribute to a national picture of the state of sustainability." Unlike the US effort, there is no summary list of indicators which will provide a comprehensive overview of Canada's ecosystems but in describing their environmental indicator program, Environment Canada hopes to develop a "core set" of indicators. "Environment Signals," Environment Canada's national environmental indicator series, presents what information is available, broken into issue areas that are structured to reflect the human activities that act as pressures on the environment. Thirteen indicators are provided in the following four main categories: Ecological Life-support Systems, Human Health and Well-being, Natural Resources Sustainability and Human Activities. Many of the indicators are linked to supplemental information, and the publication notes that Canada does not have an adequate set of indicators to evaluate overall environmental health.

While the gaps are significant there are some relative bright spots in environmental monitoring. Air quality has systematically been tracked in Canada and the US since at least 1970. Currently, both Canada and the US monitor all five common air pollutants: sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), ground-level ozone (O3) and particulate matter.

In Canada, ambient levels of NO2, SO2, TSP, and CO have fallen by at least 39.0% since 1980; peak concentrations of ground-level ozone have fallen but not as dramatically. The situation is similar in the US with more than 99% of the nation meeting all federal health standards for carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide.

These improvements and the expanded interest in "new" air quality issues highlights the importance of good quality environmental data. Efforts to improve ambient air quality have paid off and, while remaining vigilant on these pollution levels, further attention to other threats to air quality such as fine particulate matter and ground level ozone are now warranted. A comprehensive set of environmental data – comparable across jurisdictions – would allow policy makers to direct our attention and limited resources to the most serious threats to our environment.

Sources: The State of The Nation's Ecosystems: Measuring the Lands, Waters, and Living Resources of the United States, The H. John Heinz III Center For Science, Economics and the Environment, Cambridge University Press; Environmental Signals: Canada's National Environmental Indicator Series 2003, Environment Canada, National Indicators and Reporting Office.