SRD Tools Critical Thresholds Patrick ten Brink of IEEP Presentation 13 Feb 2007. This is about how critical environmental thresholds and trends can be integrated into evaluation.

1. SRDTOOLS
WP4: Review of Trade-offs and Critical
Thresholds
Critical thresholds and how they fit into
regional development and regional
sustainable development assessment
Patrick ten Brink
Senior Fellow and Head of Brussels Office, IEEP
Dissemination Workshop 13 February 2007
Brussels
SRDTOOLS: Methods and tools for evaluating the impact of
cohesion policies on sustainable regional development (SRD).
DGResearch Contract no:502485

2. Presentation Structure
1. What are critical thresholds?
2. Why worry about critical thresholds and trends?
3. Critical thresholds/trends - guidance for the evaluation methodology
4. Insights from the case studies
5. Where they can critical thresholds be particularly usefully applied ?
• We focus on environmental critical thresholds, but the concept applies
also to social and economic – eg employment levels, education levels,
competitiveness, economic viability etc.

3. Part 1
What are Critical Thresholds?
‘There are thresholds which cannot be crossed without endangering the basic
integrity of the system. Today we are close to many of these thresholds; we
must be ever mindful of endangering the survival of life on earth.’
The Brundtland report (1987)

4. Examples of Thresholds
• Modification of ecosystems (eg wetlands drying out >> grass lands)
• Eutrophication and oxygen loss - Algal blooms and fish kills
• Acidification (destruction of forests)
• Habitat size and species survival (too small – eg through fragmentation –
to support species)
• Invasive Species (invasives become established/dominant)
• Salt levels and soil quality (no agricultural activity above certain salinities)
• Change of status of resources (eg drinkable to undrinkable water)
• Water that needs no pre-treatment to water that does (higher costs)
• Loss of services – ex forest unable to stop mud slide / landslide
• Loss of permafrost compromises roads, houses

5. What are ‘Thresholds’ in Critical Thresholds?
‘Critical thresholds’ - a small ‘pressure’ – eg additional pollution load - can lead
to non-linear change to a system and a critical result
i.e. where there are major implications, often irreversible.
‘Threshold’ has a broader meaning,
and refers to the value of some parameter
of a system which signals a change to it,
i.e. the parameter signals a qualitative
as well as a quantitative difference
(as far as the system or system function
is concerned) on either side of the threshold.
Links to critical loads concept:
a critical load for any given ecosystem is the maximal exposure to an
anthropogenic activity (eg pollution) that an ecosystem can adjust to without
suffering long term damage
Warner-Merl 1998

6. When is it ‘Critical’ ?
‘Critical’ = factor being examined is essential for system sustainability
or integrity, i.e. it is some aspect of the system which
• makes the system what it is, or
• enables it to function as it does and
• offer the services that it does.
Eg. Population densities – below a certain point, species collapses (fish
stock – not just an environmental problem)
Eg. pH of soil or water and ability to sustain life (important to agriculture)
Eg. Soil stability and water retention from forest cover
Eg. Water content and nature of habitat (wetland)
Yes, not all will agree that ‘critical’ is ‘Critical’. There can be a
critical threshold for a local issue that may be regarded as
overall not critical for the decision at hand given other
concerns – at least it is clear.

7. Critical Thresholds and related terms
Thresholds responses Examples
Natural critical •Desertification starting
thresholds •Salination of water bodies
•Oxygen levels in water and species viability
•Soils critical loads and use (eg ph and different species)
Science established •Water unsuitable for bathing
critical thresholds •Water temperature and species viability – eg corals
•Oxygen levels and species viability
•‘Acceptable’ exposure levels to particulates, SOx, NOx etc
Political responses •Aspirational targets: CHP, Renewables, Biofuels
•National binding targets, non binding for locality or region – recycling
rates, CO2 emissions, composting rates
•Water critical load targets of ANC=0
Legal responses with •Emission limit values: SOx, NOx, particulates (LCPD)
legal thresholds •Environmental Quality standards: Ozone, NOx
•Noise – levels at the fence, night-time.
•Share of renewables (some countries)
•Use of asbestos in buildings
Stakeholder issues / •Protection of landscape value - historic woodlands, forests
particular thresholds •Incinerator or landfill location – NIMBY (not in my back yard)
•Location of radioactive waste storage location
•Emissions below legal limit levels but above acceptable social levels –
e.g. odour, noise

8. Part 2
Critical thresholds - aims of using critical
thresholds in our analysis

9. Critical trends and thresholds – why do something?
• Critical thresholds have not been sufficiently integrated into thinking
and decision making in the context of regional development.
• Decision-making explicitly or implicitly accepts trade-offs across
economic, social, human and nature domains.
• Some of these trade-offs are not sufficiently understood and decisions
as to what is appropriate can be erroneous where information is
lacking or not transparent.
• The explicit consideration of critical thresholds and critical trends in
regional development – in planning, in ex ante and ex post assessments
– can help avoid some mistaken decisions and inappropriate loss of
natural capital.
• As a result, it may avoid decisions which compromise our or others’
welfare, and which in places undermine the health of communities,
and of society.

10. What can we aim for?
• Better ex post evaluation and hence better understanding of what the
result of choices/ policies/programmes/projects actually was and hence
learn lessons for the future.
• Better ex ante assessments to help ensure that policies, programmes
and projects better reflect SD and build better on the needs and
possibilities of the region.
• Better regional planning (especially if a SWOT that incorporates critical
trends and thresholds can be used).

11. Aim of the Work on Critical Thresholds
A. The work is of potential importance to regional authorities
who wish to understand their (region’s) position vis-à-vis
critical thresholds:
a. What and where they are
b. Where they have been crossed
c. Where are they close to crossing them
d. Where are they likely to be crossed given current
developments
e. What trade-offs have occurred – and which are not in line
with sustainable development and which ones are.
Some cases of win-loss are ok – eg if WIN-loss (under weak
sustainability)
Use of thresholds can help identify cases where win-loss is
really a win-LOSS or indeed loss-loss

12. Aim of the Work on Critical Thresholds
(cont.)
B. Help evaluate and plan their policies and programmes (ex
ante assessment)- in other words: where will current plans /
policies / programmes / projects:
a. (Be likely to) lead to critical thresholds being crossed?
b. Lead to improvement vis-à-vis critical thresholds (i.e. move
away from ‘danger zone’)?
c. Allow other actions (flanking measures etc) to be taken to
reduce the threat of crossing thresholds?
d. Cross a (non-critical) threshold and yet still be ‘acceptable’
given other benefits – in other words where are the trade-
off’s acceptable (and why)?
And, of course, where did programmes, themes and project
have what impact (same questions) (ex post assessment)?

13. Part 3
Critical thresholds - the tools / evaluation
methodology

14. Methodology: Steps in the evaluation of the
State of SD of the region (including use of
critical thresholds)
1. Identify the stock and flow indicators the four capitals and
sustainable development.
2. Describe the region in terms of 4 capitals using appropriate stock
and flow indicators.
3. Work out what the developments of the key indicators are over
time.
4. Analyse the synergies and trade-offs between the 4 capitals and
general historical developments.
5. Assess what the critical thresholds are for the region.
6. Assess which ones have been breached, and which ones are in
danger of being breached
7. and what level of danger – imminent, medium term, long term.

15. Operationalising Critical Thresholds
Use of traffic light scoring
Past System: use of + and -, complemented by indicators and prose
New System proposed:
Table 1: Scoring: Traffic light system for critical thresholds
State of the environment relating to the critical threshold improving (eg regenerative capacity
greater than emissions, or other actions having a positive result)
Sufficiently close to a critical threshold that serious attention should be paid; still possible to
avoid breach of critical threshold (potentially critical trend)
Critical threshold breached or imminently breached - attention needed to avoid further
problems, to plan for consequences of loss of threshold (eg adaptation), and to compensate
losses (eg investment in ‘replacement site’ or financial compensation) etc
No impact or not applicable

16. Operationalising Critical Trends
For some issues the case studies will look at critical thresholds and
for others it makes sense to look at critical trends.
These can also be represented by the traffic light system or coloured
arrows.
Note that in some cases there can be several indicators, combining
general indicators, critical threshold based indicators and critical trend
based indicators to describe the situation. Whatever bundle of
indicators is most useful can be used.
Positive trend – moving away from a threshold (green arrow)
Trend heading towards a threshold - serious attention should be paid; still possible to
avoid breach of critical threshold (potentially critical trend) (amber arrow)
Critical trend - e.g. such that critical threshold will inevitably be breached - attention
needed to avoid further problems, to plan for consequences of loss of threshold (e.g.
adaptation), and to compensate losses (e.g. investment in ‘replacement site’ or
financial compensation) etc (red arrow)
No impact or not applicable (white arrow)

17. s
d
es/
on)
T.I.
T.P.
U.R.
S.M.
1999)
1999)
1999)
2006)
W.M.
(1994-
(1994-
(1991-
(1994-
(2000-
93 and
project
Measur
+
+
(+)
(+)
(+)
Economic growth and
balanced economic growth
0
0
0
0
+
Improved accessibility of
d Capital
external markets and internal
0
0
0
+
(+)
Levels of education and
vocational qualifications
)
+
+
+
+
(+
Employment levels (Youth
Capital
Selecte Manufacture Human
)
)
0
0
0
and women)
(+
(+
Entrepreneurship
R+D investments
0 0
0 0
0 +
+ +
+ +
Links between public and
private leading to innovation
)
)
)
0
+
(+
(+
(+
Survival of companies
0
0
0
+
Social Capital
(+)
Income disparities and
disparities in quality of life
)
?
0
0
0
(+
Employment durability
-
-
+
+
+
Land use
-
-
0
+
+
Nature conservation
Capital
Natural
-
0
+
+
+
Resource management
0
+
→
←
←
Spatial balance versus
concentration and spin offs
0
0
0
←
←
Eco efficiency and economic
Trade-Offs
growth in rural communities
0
0
+
+
(+)
Diversification of rural
communities and economic
0
0
0
+
(+)
Develop cooperation with
Win-wins
Africa and Portugal
-
0
+
+
+
Eco-efficiency and economic

18. Integrating critical thresholds
Selected Planned Natural Capital Natural Capital
Measures/ Spend
– last study evaluation – SRDTools approach
projects
(EU funding) approach
in Million
Euros
Land use – eg forest
Land use – eg forest
Nature conservation
Nature conservation
Climate
Climate
cover
cover
Transport 2123
infrastructure - - -
(1036)
(2000-2006)

19. Integrating critical thresholds
Overviews, aggregates and details
• Note that evaluating a programme or a priority area / theme that builds on a wide
range of projects will not necessarily lead to a single aggregate indicator
• – so there can be a bundle of indicators and ‘traffic lights’.
• Note that some green and yellow lights at the project level can cancel each other
out when considering the programme effect.
• However, red lights can in principle not be ‘cancelled out’ given their importance.
• Important not to go for single average and the benefit is seeing all the issues.
• See also the ‘deliberative matrix’ tool.

20. Part 4: Critical thresholds - Insights from the Case
Studies - Questions they covered
1. Which critical thresholds, or trends, if any, can be identified in relation to the
key trade-offs and related indicators in the region?
2. Are any of the thresholds being breached already?
3. Are any of the thresholds threatened by critical trends?
4.What stakeholder acceptance or resistance is there to existing breaches and to
critical trends and potential breach of critical thresholds?
5. Has there been a policy response to these critical trends/thresholds?
6. Is the policy response adequate from the viewpoint of different stakeholders?
7. What further policy responses or investments are needed to recover from
breaches, or to avoid a breach where there are critical trends?
8. Can the issue be adequately addressed at a regional level by regional decision-
makers, or is a different level of approach needed (e.g. global, national)?
9. Finally, are there other critical thresholds or trends in the region, but that are not
relevant to the key trade-offs that were identified?

21. Cases study: East Midlands
The key issue investigated was the impact of increased housing developments on
region’s water resources. Critical trends were identified in relation to:
• falling ground water levels,
• increasing pollution levels, and
• increasing flood risk.
There was already evidence that water
consumption thresholds were being
breached in some areas.
The Environment Agency - the region
has a ‘vulnerable water environment’
+ ‘there is little further indigenous
resource that can be developed without
compromising the water environment’
Source Medhurst J and House S of GHK

22. Cases study: East Midlands
• A risk map has been developed
by the Environment Agency
• to highlight areas where new
development could put pressure
on the waste treatment
infrastructure.
• The map shows that there are a
number of Sewage Treatment
Works that are in the ‘high’ risk
category, in terms of the
pollution capacity (BOD risk)
and flow risk (capacity of river to
hold higher volumes).
• These are particularly
concentrated in the West of the
region.
Source Medhurst J and House S of GHK

23. Cases study: CR: Prague & Urban Sprawl
Type of capital Critical trends local regional national
concerned
man-made road system capacity / o/r r o
Natural noise load / o g
g/o
Natural dust and smog emission load / o g
g/o
man-made, natural traffic congestions / o/r r g
man-made, natural individual automobile o o g
conveyance
man-made, natural change of the compact character o o o
of the city
man-made, natural transformation of outer urban o o o
areas
natural, human change in land use o g g
Source Blažek J. et al (2006)

24. Cases study: Prague – some key insights
• with respect to the nature of identified critical trends it was hard
to set critical thresholds in terms of precise figures; the least
complicated situation appeared to be regarding natural capital
• as fundamental it should be seen the identification of trends that
are threaten breaking critical thresholds (e.g. critical trends
related to road system capacity)
• critical thresholds would differ either on various geographical
levels or even within the certain geographical level
• critical thresholds are having diverse relevancy or significance
on different geographical levels
Source Blažek J. et al (2006)

25. Cases study: Poland - Lubuskie Voivodship
•At Lake Slawskie: large-scale intensive agricultural production, including animal farms,
butchery and meat industry.
•The lake >> increasingly polluted - from 1997 to 2004 overgrown with algae.
•Historically - lake a valuable tourist destination, with 35-40 thousand tourists in the
summer, supporting about 1,000 jobs in the tourist industry.
•There has also been a fishing industry (25-30 tonnes of fish per year) and the lake is a
refuge for species facing extinction: smooth snake, marsh tortoise, European bittern; it is
also a breeding ground for 130 bird species.
•Now a lot of this is lost due to pollution from the large scale intensive agriculture
Water pollution Water quality regarded as third grade. red
(natural capital) Species loss
red
Leads to reduction in Area being considered less attractive to orange
manufactured capital tourism
(tourism)
orange
Also affects human capital Risk of harmful impact on human health orange
(and societal capital –
recreation)
orange
Source Building on SRDTOOLS work by K.Olejniczak, A.Płoszaj, M.Smętkowski

26. Cases study: Andalucia
Orange
There are 4803 Hm3/p.a. of water supply and
Water use and availability water use of 5454 Hm3/p.a. according to the
– and depletion of Century XXI strategic assessment of Andalucía.
/damage to groundwater
There is a high exploitation of reserves in aquifers
aquifers Red
of 31% with a resulting drop in levels – there is
increasing seawater intrusion in coastal aquifers
compromising its quality, usability and increasing
costs of pre-treatment.
Also high use/regulation of water resources
Orange
(Guadalquivir 63%).
There is increased urbanization of coastal areas,
including the occupation of the coastal public
Urbanization of coastal Red
domain and the creation of an urban continuum.
strip/unprotected areas –
Critical threshold already breached (some say:
Marbella) or inevitably breached (all agree bar
some sceptics, usually with interests in being
‘sceptics’) at regional scale. Action should be
taken.
Damage to protected areas Orange In Andalucía 17.1% of the territory is natural
areas. There is an important need to keep some
levels of connectivity and integration of these
areas to insure the conservation of biodiversity.
Trend heading towards a threshold - serious
attention should be paid, and policy measures
should be investigated.
Source Building on work by Josefina Maestu and Pedro Ortiz

27. Slovenia - Pomurje Regional Case Study
Figure 4.4 : Spatial allocation of the main trade-offs in Pomurje
Major settlements
The main transport corridors
(incl. 5th EU road corridor)
Area 1: win-loss trade-offs:
N+ x (H, S, M)-
Area 2: win-loss trade-offs:
N+ x (S, M)-
Area 3: win-win trade-offs
(possible win-loss with N):
S+ x M+ (x N-)
Area 4: win-win trade-offs
(possible win-loss with N):
H+ x M+ (x N-)
Area 5: win-win trade-offs:
(possible win-loss with N)
S+ x N+ (x N-)
Area 6: loss-loss trade-offs:
N- x M-
Area 7: loss-loss trade-offs:
N- x (M; S)-
Source Building on work by Romeo Varga and Colleagues

28. Part 5
Critical thresholds - Where can they
usefully be applied?
• SWOTs and regional development planning
• Sustainable Development Assessment of the region
• Ex post assessment
– e.g. of previous policies, programmes, projects
• Ex ante assessment
e.g. of future policies, programmes, projects
• Resource mapping and housing development decisions
• Flood risk mapping

29. Background on SWOTs
•In the UK, for example, most RDPs have SWOTs that include with
environmental issues.
•The RDPs tend to contain a section entitled ‘Environmental Profile’ or
similar which outlines the environmental baseline, highlighting the
environmental issues of importance to the regions.
•In some cases a full environmental SWOT is included, however, usually there
is a general SWOT for the whole programme.
•In the general SWOTs consideration of the environment ranges from very
limited with one or two elements mentioned to more comprehensive
Objective 1 regions - UK, Merseyside (General SWOT)
Outstanding wildlife habitats and coastal environment. Real potential to
Distinctive and attractive physical environment. build on existing
Objective 2 Regions - South Scotland’s (Environmental SWOT) system and
High quality natural environment and landscapes
strengthen it
Good and expanding range of environment related recreational facilities
A growing environmental business sector

30. SWOTs - should systematically look to integrate
environmental critical trends and thresholds
Strengths Weaknesses
(a) what are the natural resources that (a) Are there any critical environmental
already or potentially contribute (the issues in the region?
‘opportunities’) to society and its (b) Are there critical trends or thresholds
human, social and economic (c) Can they be influenced positively or
welfare and development, negatively by proposed projects or
(b) ensure that these resources are policies?
built upon or safeguarded and not (d) Issues there a need to compensate
compromised by other policies or those facing the loss or invest to
actions. develop/extend another site to
substitute for the loss.
Opportunities Threats
(a) Are there any opportunities to ‘build (a) What threats are there to biodiversity
on’ the natural capital? and eco-system services?
(b)Are there any opportunities to protect (b) Where are we particularly close to a
this natural capital? threshold?
(c) Do developments / projects / policies
threaten the natural capital and system
viability?

31. Sustainable Development Assessment of the region
• Identify the main developments in the region for the four capitals over the
useful past - data (indicators for the region) and practical insight (cases).
This could usefully build on any available SWOT analysis.
• Identify general trade-offs made between the capitals.
• Identify environmental issues for which trends and thresholds might be
important or critical even – generally and specifically where there are
insights on trade-offs.
• Complement, or rather complete, the trade-off analysis with the use of
critical thresholds – where are there critical thresholds/trends related to
the trade-offs.
• Synthesise insights as to where the regional development was sustainable
or not – in terms of win-wins, trade-offs, and ‘SD-unacceptable’ trade-offs
given critical thresholds and trends.

32. Evaluation of programmes and projects
1. Note the range of programmes and projects in the region and select
an appropriate sample/case to explore in detail
2. Develop appropriate SD indicator set to allow analysis.
3. Analyse the impact of the programme or project on the 4 capitals and
assess synergies (win-wins) and trade-offs.
4. Assess what the relevant critical thresholds are related to the
programme/project at hand.
5. Analyse whether the programme/project has breached a critical
threshold or not, or whether increasing the risk of this (and over what
timescale likely problem is to arise) – for ex post assessment.
6. Where a critical threshold has been breached reconsider whether the
trade-offs were acceptable or retrospectively should not have taken
place (ie had the additional information been available). – for an ex
post analysis

33. Ex post assessment
– e.g. of previous policies, programmes, projects
This would start with a normal SD assessment of the region, and in addition
for the policy, programme or project of interest:
• Identify how the policy, programme or project could in principle interact
with the four capitals (generally, and specifically – for specific indicators;
direct and indirect). This helps identify the scope of the analysis.
• Identify which environmental issues were affected or potentially affected
and identify which if any critical trends or thresholds exist.
• Develop indicator data to assesses the trade-offs that relate to the policy,
programme or project.
• Complement with additional facts on trade-offs (soft knowledge, interviews
with experts, those involved/affected, other evidence that might not be
indicator based).
• Explore whether there has been a contribution to a critical trend or critical
threshold being breached.
• Reassess the trade-offs. Were some wrongly characterised in the past?
• Synthesise insights
• Conclude which tradeoffs had appeared appropriate but upon reflection using
critical thresholds were shown to have been inappropriate
• Identify lessons for how this could be avoided in the future – processes,
policies, evaluation styles.

34. Ex ante assessment
e.g. of future policies, programmes, projects
This could be a general ex ante assessment or a specific contribution to Impact Assessment
depending on what is being assessed. In general a project would be covered by an EIA,
plans and programmes by an SEA and policies by IA if EU level.
• Develop (or identify if already existing) a vision of the development of the region and in
particular the area related to the policy, programme and project.
• Identify those issues across the four capitals that would directly or indirectly be relevant
to the policy, programme and project being evaluated.
• Ensure that those areas of sensitivity to the region are noted (e.g. from SWOT – either
existing or carry one out; this should include policy and objectives analysis for the
region) and clarify suitable indicators and other information and data needs (including
stakeholders to be affected).
• Develop a future reference case for developments of key indicators for the four capitals
for the region, with a particular focus of those indicators or insights linked to critical
trends or thresholds.
• Explore the likely impacts of the policy, programme or project across the four capitals
issues identified as potential/likely to be sensitive, paying special attention to critical
trends and thresholds in the area.
• Identify likely trade-offs, possible negative affects on critical thresholds and trends.
• Assess whether trade-offs, if and where they exist, are warranted in light of additional
insights on critical trends and thresholds.

35. Where can critical trends & thresholds be useful?
• Ex ante, sustainable development (SD), and ex post assessments
• Integration into SWOT analysis within regional planning activities
• Water Framework Directive-related assessments and reporting
• Strategic Environmental Assessments - the integration of critical
thresholds into the SEA process would enable the decision-makers to
identify any of the critical trends where trade-offs would not be
acceptable
• Flood risk and risk mapping for housing development
• National SD assessments and reporting
Basis of policy response – eg target setting; legislative setting (eg
exposure thresholds (EQS), emissions limits (ELVs)
Better explicit understanding of what the decisions really were/are
Better decisions
Less wasteful use of natural resources; more suitable protection
Real stewardship, realised responsibility and sustainable development

36. SRDTOOLS
WP4: Review of Trade-offs and Critical
Thresholds
Thank you – Questions?
Where do you see the integration of critical
thresholds as most useful?
Patrick ten Brink
ptenbrink@ieep.eu
Dissemination Workshop 13 February 2007
Brussels
See also http://www.srdtools.info/ for other outputs from the wide SRDTOOLS team