 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Opinion of tools
Name of the case study
Sustainable Development Strategy and Action Plan, Velingrad Municipality
Name of tool
Set of Local Sustainability Indicators (LSI)
Opinion of tool - argumentation for choosing the tool
The reason for choosing LSI to evaluate the effectiveness of SDS implementation was the attempt to adapt existing international knowledge and good practice in the field of sustainability to Bulgarian local level where no preliminary experience in this field existed. The SDS was expected to clearly formulate the sustainable development priorities of the municipality and to assist the decision making process by providing a tool (LSI) for monitoring and assessment of urban sustainability. The will for a new holistic view on the development of the municipality under changing social and economic conditions in the country was a driving force for the elaboration of the SDS.
The elaboration of the SDS was a joint initiative of the Municipality and the expert team from Capacity 21 National Programme. The indicators were agreed upon by all the actors involved in the elaboration of the SDS.
The criteria for choosing the LSI were:
• Reliability – to reflect fundamental and already proven aspects which are important in the local context;
• Acceptance by the public – to be appreciated by the local community as a visible sign of moving towards or away from sustainability;
• Attractiveness to the local media – to get the attention of local newspapers, TV and radio, to be readily published and used for analysis of societal tendencies, thus raising awareness;
• Empirical value –to provide comparability of information with former time periods and available statistical data;
To be logical and scientifically valid.
The Municipality had no knowledge of other evaluation tools; therefore the expert team based its proposals on the framework of the European Urban Charter developed in accordance with Agenda 21. The set of indicators was based on "Indicators of Sustainable Development Framework and Methodologies" (UN model) and on creatively implemented previous NGO experience in the cities of Varna (Bulgaria) and Seattle.
The planning tools previously used at the municipal and regional level did not explicitly consider the issues of sustainable spatial development and were not tailored to the peculiar local conditions in the municipality.
Opinion of tool - barriers for the tool implementation
The LSI implementation started in 1999. It seemed difficult and not very effective. Public awareness of the role and importance of the indicators needs further development. A detailed monitoring of the process is needed to outline and classify particular obstacles.
Financial difficulties – some of the planned actions were delayed as they relied on private investment that was not realised and thus the indicators tracing their impact on the development of the municipality became irrelevant;
Considerable dynamics of changes in real estate management during privatisation and restoration of ownership on urban land - numerous contradictions claiming ownership over sites (lack of adequate record) created barriers to the implementation of already developed urban management indicators; Lack of practical experience in using indicators by all the local actors involved;
Policy discontinuity - Due to a number of local political changes within a short period of time the Municipality has not been persistent in developing and updating the LSI.
Opinion of tool - assessment by tool users
Due to the comprehensive environmental indicators applied, considerable increase in the amount of green spaces is reported by the Municipality and special attention was paid to the preservation and maintenance of public open and green spaces in the town and its surroundings.
Well maintained greenery in the main pedestrian street to the town centre
The discussions resulted in general rising public awareness and activity; further attention focused on the need for improving municipal policy in the fields of employment, education human resources. Meanwhile a Business and Information Center was created. The JOBS (Job Opportunities through Business Support Programme) office in Velingrad, which is estimated as one of the most successful in the country, stands to benefit from the previously gained experiences. Another impact of the SDS development in Velingrad was that the experience reached other Bulgarian Municipalities. Velingrad shared its approaches with other Bulgarian neighbouring Municipalities through nationwide awareness-raising campaigns, training seminars and workshops for effective networking. Velingrad Municipality established co-operation arrangements, supporting other communities to draw upon their experiences and develop their own Local Agendas 21.
The SDS contributes for increasing local people’s commitment; it supports public participation which is the basis for action transparency; it favourably influences local authorities’ capability of listening to people’s ideas and proposals before taking decisions.The feedback resulting from LSI implementation makes local authorities more confident in their efforts to implement sustainability considerations and shows them where to focus and reinforce the actions in progress. Additional efforts to provide transparency have been realised through continuous dialogue between partners, to achieve a shared vision for the future. Furthermore the ability to identify problems was an important step for overcoming them. Defining challenges in participatory, multidisciplinary forums helps to ensure that they were accurately defined and become generally accepted.
LSI could be useful in evaluating the processes during sustainable municipal development. However some recommendations are to be outlined: Need for ‘chains of indicators’ to trace the links of social, economic and environmental consequences of actions; Addition of relevant indicators concerning tourism development and energy efficiency;
The local authorities and municipal experts consider it a generally successful initial step in building public awareness, yet difficult to implement in some practical aspects because of being too general.
Actors involved (experts from the municipality, local NGOs) consider that additional development of the LSI is necessary in order to use it more effectively in future.
“I think that the main success in all these activities (e.g. elaboration of the SDS) is that we have changed the minds of many people at the national and local levels. Not only people from institutions, but also the common people understood what sustainable development is and that there is no contradiction between the words sustainability and development.” Belin Mollov, expert from Capacity 21 program involved in the elaboration of the SDS.
Opinion of tool - reviewer\'s assessment
The set of indicators is a dynamic system and has to be continually updated and revised to answer the changes in the Municipality. The SDS and LSI are generally useful as a first step towards the evaluation of urban sustainability and provide a holistic view on the development processes in the municipality.
Some general shortcomings of the LSI could be pointed out:
• Lack of indicators directly concerning pressures caused by tourism although it is pointed out to be a priority in the action plan;
• No indicators concerning energy efficiency;
• Lack of indicators on transport efficiency.
What tools were used to assess sustainability?
Set of Local Sustainability Indicators (LSI)
More information