1. Strategic Planning

1.1    Characteristics of a strategic plan for the SEEA and resulting benefits
1.2    Step 1: Establishing a ‘core national stakeholder group’
1.3    Step 2: Conducting an assessment of the institutional and data environment
1.4    Key aspects in preparing an assessment report
   1.4.1    Policy priorities, targets and indicators  

   1.4.2    Stakeholders and institutional arrangements/frameworks
   1.4.3    Data sources
   1.4.4    Existing accounts and previous studies
   1.4.5    Constraints
   1.4.6    Recommendations for priority accounts and next steps
Country example: the Philippines

1.0 Overview

What is the objective of strategic planning? The objective of strategic planning is to ensure that the compilation of the SEEA is made part of the regular production process and that the resulting data/accounts are used in policy and decision-making. Strategic planning involves bringing key stakeholders together to determine a plan for establishing the SEEA based on national policy priorities and data available. Often times, stakeholders undertake the collaborative development of a strategic plan which is agreed by various stakeholders and guides implementation activities in the country.  

Why is it particularly important for the SEEA? Data on the environment is usually produced by various different institutions, each using different data sources, definitions and classifications (i.e. data siloes). As the SEEA is an integrated system, it necessitates integrating these disparate data sources into an accounting framework. Thus, coordination and collaboration are key to creating the accounts, and compilers will need to ensure that the different data producers understand the value added of integrating their data in the accounting system—namely the regular production of coherent, consistent, policy-relevant data. Having an agreed-upon national plan for the SEEA facilitates the coordination and collaboration needed for the regular production of the accounts.

1.1    Characteristics of a strategic plan for the SEEA and resulting benefits

As environmental accounting is a newer field of statistics, strategic planning can help ensure that the accounts are successfully institutionalized within the national statistical system, and equally important, mainstreamed into policy. In the context of SEEA implementation, it is recommended that strategic planning takes place amongst all stakeholders—both producers and users of the accounts. The strategic planning phase includes an outreach phase to explain the accounts and their benefits. An inclusive approach to strategic planning can ensure that national statistical offices have political and financial support for this long-term investment. Moreover, bringing together producers and users can ensure that the accounts produced speak to policy demands and environmental monitoring needs at both the national and international level. Linking accounts compilation to policy priorities helps ensure buy-in from data providers and users of the accounts and makes it more likely that long-term funding can be acquired..

In addition, creating a strategic plan can help ensure that the accounts produced are high-quality. During the creation of a strategic plan, stakeholders can systematically identify strengths and weaknesses of statistical capacity in producing basic source data used for the accounts and create a plan to remedy these weaknesses. This can ensure that the resulting data and indicators produced are trustworthy and of high-quality.

There are two recommended key steps in strategic planning for the SEEA. It is suggested to, first, establish a core, national stakeholder group on environmental accounting and second, conduct an assessment of the institutional and data environment of the SEEA (generally at the national level).

1.2    Step 1: Establishing a ‘core national stakeholder group’

The implementation of the SEEA accounts, by their nature, requires multi-stakeholder commitment. It requires the expertise of statisticians and national accountants most likely drawn from national statistical offices, GIS experts drawn from both within the NSO, mapping agencies and other agencies with geo-spatial specific mandates, and environmental experts (ecologists, hydrologists etc). As such, one person alone cannot create a feasible strategic plan or complete a full assessment of the policy and data environment. Consequently, it has proven to be beneficial that a small (perhaps 4-6 members), core group of stakeholders exist in the initial stages of implementation to drive the process forward.

Where appropriate and possible, this core group may be formed from within existing processes related to the advancement of environmental information in the national statistical systems. Depending on the administrative and governance processes that exist in a particular country, the core national stakeholder group may be established as a sub-committee or working party from a broader inter-governmental process – for example as a sub-committee of the board that oversees the national statistical system or the board responsible for the national development plans. If such a process does not exist or is not considered appropriate, then a separate core national stakeholder group should be formed.

The group may include representatives from national statistical organizations, the ministry of environment, planning and finance ministries, line ministries and relevant experts from academia who have been involved in earlier studies on environmental accounting. It usually consists of middle/high level managers and experts. The group is to draft or oversee the drafting of the national plan and roadmap and will encourage the management of their respective agencies to support the group’s outputs. The group may include both data producers and users. Including data users in the group is important in order for the accounts to respond to policy needs. Similarly, including data providers in the group will help facilitate the necessary data sharing and exchange needed in compiling the accounts.

Representatives from the government agency (or agencies) that will take the lead role in compiling the SEEA accounts will play a key role in the stakeholder group. The agency producing the accounts will have a core role of integrating data, but this may differ according to the account. In many cases (but not all), the compiling agency is the national statistical office. While the national statistical office may have limited expertise in environmental information itself, they can bring essential skills of managing and integrating national data sets, applying standards and classifications, and providing independently authorized official statistics.

It should be noted that even though it is recommended that the stakeholder group functions at a higher level, securing buy-in and commitment at all levels in line ministries is essential. Without communication and securing buy-in, line ministries may interpret the national statistical office's suggestion to create environmental accounts (or act as a data steward) as intrusive. Moreover, it is often the case that the accounts will yield results that are different from data previously and continuously produced, due to differences in scope, concepts and definitions. Hence, it is important to communicate the usefulness of the accounts and their complementariness to existing efforts to line ministries. 

Ministries other than the national statistical office may compile the accounts, depending on the institutional set up of the country, or if priority accounts require technologies or expertise which cannot be found in the national statistical office. However, the national statistical office is usually still closely involved in these situations, and it is important that the accounts are integrated into the national statistical system and with other aspects of national statistics, such as the System of National Accounts. This ensures that the accounts will not be used in a siloed nature. 

In addition, national statistical offices are increasingly acting more as data stewards. As data stewards, NSOs shift from being solely producers of statistics, to also becoming service providers, whereby NSOs facilitate a collaborative approach to data and statistics across different data and statistics communities and provide appropriate oversight and governance. By acting as data stewards, national statistical offices ensure that whoever produces the accounts fulfills the appropriate official statistical requirements for independence and quality concerning the compilation and release of data. It is recommended that national statistical offices serve as data stewards for all parts of official statistics, including the SEEA. 

When it comes to the SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA), the mapping agency deserves special mention. Most countries have a central mapping agency responsible for producing official maps, such as official country borders, administrative maps, land cover maps, etc. As the SEEA EA is spatially explicit, its implementation will almost certainly closely involve the central mapping agency or the agency having the mandate to produce national land cover maps. Thus, particularly for SEEA EA implementation, the central mapping agency should be closely involved, and be part of the core national stakeholder group.

1.3    Step 2: Conducting an assessment of the policy and data environment

The second step of strategic planning entails conducting an assessment of the policy and data environment. This can entail the core national stakeholder group visiting different institutions/ministries to explain what the SEEA is, obtain information on policy priorities, engage with relevant projects and data collection initiatives, and explaining the value added of integrating data through the accounts. These visits help educate and sensitize data providers and users. As a result, the process of conducting the assessment is nearly as important as the output/outcome.

As its initial focus, the national stakeholder group should complete an initial national assessment of the policy and data ecosystem within which implementation of the SEEA would be undertaken. Main areas of the assessment could include: 1) policy priorities, targets and indicators; 2) stakeholders and institutional arrangements/frameworks; 3) data sources; 4) existing accounts and previous studies; 5) constraints; 6) opportunities, including current projects/activities that the compilation of accounts can leverage or be in synergy with; and 7) recommendations for priority accounts and next steps.

It is likely that conducting the assessment and preparing an assessment report will take some iteration and discussion between relevant key users and producers. However, the goal of the assessment report is not necessarily to obtain large amounts of highly detailed information, but rather to obtain sufficient information to determine appropriate courses of action. Much will be gained by starting the assessment process and “learning by doing”. Benefits are also likely to be gained from sharing experiences across countries in similar situations.

It might be necessary to adapt the proposed materials and processes to national circumstances. In particular, as far as possible, the suggested approaches outlined here should be integrated into existing mechanisms, and the SEEA process should be a catalyst to advance relevant national initiatives. Ultimately, a national assessment report should be able to provide a link between the relevant policy priorities and their associated targets and indicators, and the general feasibility of compiling particular accounts. Information on relevant financing sources and related initiatives are also likely to be particularly important parts of the report.

The preparation of a national assessment report provides the basis for deciding the direction of SEEA implementation at the national level. While it is possible that the core group is authorized to make the relevant decisions to move forward with implementation, it is more likely that the core group will need to present the assessment report and the relevant recommendations to a higher level of government. It is therefore important that there is clear understanding in the first instance of the relevant authorizing mechanisms and that communication on progress between the core group and relevant groups and agencies takes place on a regular basis.

1.4    Key aspects in preparing an assessment report

As noted above, a national assessment of the institutional and data environment could cover seven main areas: 1) policy priorities, targets and indicators; 2) stakeholders and institutional arrangements/frameworks; 3) data sources; 4) existing accounts and previous studies; 5) constraints; 6) opportunities, including current projects/activities that the compilation of accounts can leverage or be in synergy with; and 7) recommendations for priority accounts and next steps. These are detailed below.

   1.4.1    Policy priorities, targets and indicators

This area involves an initial assessment by the relevant stakeholders of policy issues that could be informed through the implementation of the SEEA. It should be as concrete as possible. Thus, it should not only detail the policy issue (e.g., climate adaptation), but the specific policy or programme which the accounts could inform, as well as the institution responsible for implementing the policy or programme.

This part of the assessment could benefit from the development of a theory of change or logical framework which starts from the policy impacts and works backwards to determine the accounts needed to achieve those impacts. A theory of change/logical framework for the SEEA should indicate the inputs, outputs, outcomes and impacts of the development of the accounts for policy. 

   1.4.2    Stakeholders and institutional arrangements/frameworks

This area concerns an initial assessment of stakeholders including their overall mandate and any specific mandate related to the SEEA; statistical capacity; data sharing arrangements; data security; and other arrangements required to produce and use environmental accounts. Stakeholders are classified as producers, users, collaborators, or some combination of the three (e.g. two different units within the same agency may have different roles) of the accounts and supporting statistics. They may include central government agencies; environment and natural resource government agencies; universities and academia; and NGOs and private industry associations. Creating linkages between the data sources and the agencies that own and manage the relevant data is a fundamental step in developing the required networks for the co-ordination of data sharing and the compilation of accounts. 

   1.4.3    Data sources

Based on the prioritization of accounts, the next step would be to undertake an initial assessment of data sources.

In many cases, particularly for the SEEA Central Framework, the key data required to compile the accounts can be derived from existing national data sets. For example, much of the monetary information needed to populate the accounts can be derived from the national accounts. Many countries also have, among others, pollutant release and transfer registries (PRTRs), energy statistics, water statistics, and land cover/use maps which can be used in the compilation of air emission, energy, water and land cover accounts. Other statistics like traffic data or administrative data may also be used to compile the accounts. 

An initial assessment of data sources contains details about the availability of specific data sources that may be relevant for the SEEA. This assessment should indicate who is responsible for maintaining the datasets, if/how compilers of the accounts can access the data and the standards used to collect and organize the data. The assessment of data sources provides an opportunity to provide more detail in terms of accessibility, standards used and responsibilities for the data.

   1.4.4    Existing accounts and previous studies

Some countries may already produce specific SEEA accounts, while others may have conducted pilot accounts or have compiled accounts in the past. It is important for the core group to have an inventory of currently and previously compiled accounts, so that they can build on previous/existing efforts and coordinate future activities with the relevant groups. This work may or may not have been done by the national statistical office. In many cases, pilot accounts or studies have been conducted by universities, NGOs or research centers. Information on existing accounts and previous studies may be found in national development plans, sustainable development plans, national statistical development strategies, resource management plans, environment statistics reports and in academic journals.

   1.4.5    Constraints

A national assessment should be realistic, and as such, should recognize and anticipate possible barriers—both for countries who have compiled the accounts and for countries who are at the beginning of their implementation. This can allow the core group to better understand how to overcome or address possible constraints. The barriers faced by countries depend significantly on the country’s individual circumstances and often differ according to whether a country has compiled SEEA accounts before or is starting compilation for the first time. Some potential barriers may include a lack of human or financial resources, poor data availability and/or quality, lack of the proper institutional set-up, lack of user awareness or interest, lack of access to training materials, or lack of understanding of the usefulness of the accounts.

   1.4.6    Recommendations for priority accounts and next steps

Building upon the information collected as part of the prior items of assessment, the core group should determine priority accounts and next steps. A determination of priority accounts should consider both the feasibility of implementing the specific accounts as well as the demand and potential uses of the accounts. It should be noted that determinations of feasibility should take into consideration 1) the appropriateness and quality of the source data; 2) technical and resource capacity to compile the accounts given the source data; 3) the readiness of stakeholders to provide the necessary data; and 4) the readiness of stakeholders to use the results.

The recommendations should also provide advice on the institutional mechanism needed for the implementation of the accounts. More details about the institutional mechanism are provided in section 3.

The next steps for countries will vary depending on the context within which the recommendations are being made and the outcome of the feasibility assessment.  Some potential scenarios are shown in the table below. It is likely that the work under multiple scenarios below is relevant for a particular account (e.g., additional capacity building and additional data might be required for an account to be feasible). The steps below are also further discussed in sections 3 (building mechanisms for implementation) and 4 (compiling and disseminating the accounts).

However, in most cases, a beneficial approach is to begin compilation with the available data and resources. This will usually mean that there are data gaps, but one can then develop a strategy to fill the data gaps. It is also important to note that the accounts can be released on an experimental basis. This is beneficial, as it keeps users engaged and illustrates the types of information and indicators that the accounts can provide.