Final report - Integrated Land Management Bureau

indicators, and some are not being included because they did not meet one or more of the
selection criteria, not because they are poor indicators of human well-being. More than
15 indicators suggested at the workshop were added to the final list of recommended
indicators.
Table 17 Indicators suggested at the July 20 workshop that are not included in final recommended
list
Indicator suggested at workshop Rationale for not including them in final
recommended list
Percent of household expenditures spent
inside the plan areas
Number of First Nations who have migrated
back to the community per year
Number and percent of archeological studies
that result in further study
First Nations harvest levels of cultural and
traditional resources per capita
Does not meet Criteria 7: “Where there are no
existing data available at the appropriate scale
and boundary overlap is a problem, is primary
data collection logistically possible and
affordable to measure this indicator?”
(Rationale: This indicator would require an
economic leakage study, which is very
expensive to conduct - would require a random
sample of households tracking their
expenditures by week or month).
Does not meet Criteria 8: “Is the desirable
direction of the indicator obvious (up or
down)?”
(Rationale: Migration could be either a
negative or positive indicator)
Does not meet Criteria 2: “Are there logical
links between the indicator and the objective it
purports to measure?”
(Rationale: There are many reasons why a
given area is further studied so it would be
impossible to isolate what led to further study)
Does not meet Criteria 7: “Where there are no
existing data available at the appropriate scale
and boundary overlap is a problem, is primary
data collection logistically possible and
affordable to measure this indicator?”
(Rationale: Too many different products, and
there is variability in what constitutes
harvesting)
61