revision to 'sustainable development target'

[mark-jensen]

Propose that sustainable development target be moved under IAO objective specification and defined as

An objective specification which describes the endpoint of a sustainable development process and is part of a sustainable development goal.

[pbuttigieg]

The current def is:

A threshold value of a sustainable development indicator or a set of threshold values of several such indicators towards or beyond which corresponding indicator values from a socio-economic-environmental system should tend in order to meet a sustainable development goal.

The thinking here is that indicators (see #58) are actual parts of a system which can be examined to inform us about that system's health. This is done by performing some OBI planned processes to observe and create data (indicator values SDGIO_00000003) about those indicators. A target is a value towards which those indicator values should tend. If they do, it should mean that the objective specification of some SDG is being (partially) met.

Targets, therefore, are semantically close to indicator values in that we assume that they are the indicator values of a system that has achieved some SDG. I'm not sure how to treat a data item which is about a hypothetical system yet.

@phismith proposed a framework for targets and indicators, including a dimension along which indicator values and targets could be distributed.

[cfrancois7]

Why not define the sustainable development target as a process. The purpose is to achieve a sustainable development process (process) that meets a sustainable development goal (objective specification). The sustainable development target could be the process profile of the sustainable development process.

I know this proposition is far from the current definition.

[pbuttigieg]

@cfrancois7 Thanks for your input!

We currently see targets as being more on the data/information side as most of them reference some threshold (e.g. X% employment) which is believed to coincide with a value that would indicate a desirable system is in place. I don't see how this could be a process (however, the processes which drive the system towards/away from that target must also be represented).

Could you give an example of how your thinking would play out using one or more of the SDG targets?

[phismith]

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 8:53 AM, cfrancois7 notifications@github.com wrote:

Why not defined the sustainable development target as a process. The purpose is to achieve a sustainable development process (process) that meets a sustainable development goal (objective specification). The _sustainable development target_s could be the _process profile_s of the sustainable development process.

​This just pushes the issue back one step (and adds an extra and unhelpful layer of complexity)

We want to measure process towards a target The target is creating another process (call it a cfrancois7-process) But then that 2nd process has to have a target (I suppose that, too, might be a process (perhaps a cfrancois7-squared process)​

I know this proposition is far from the current definition.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SDG-InterfaceOntology/sdgio/issues/59#issuecomment-256912722, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AH6qNwg5ZfgvPLVospsfUNt-OBAP6eG0ks5q4fA3gaJpZM4G0csr .

[cfrancois7]

Yes, I agree it adds an extra layer. In the approach I proposed, the targets are the measures of the process profiles of a process that is a sustainable process, e.g. this process will meet one or more sustainable development goals. For instance, It comes from an experimentation or a simulation and the instance is called the "reference sustainable process". Now, if the measures of the process profiles of a second process are higher (or lower) of this reference sustainable process, then it is a sustainable process by inferences.

My example is inspired from the acid/basic, redox or thermodynamic chemical reactions. Through a lot of experiments or models, it is now possible to draw the diagrams (several process profiles of several experimental processes) on which we define the thresholds of interests, e.g. the ratio of oxidation reactions on reduction ones that induces a dissolution/precipitation of the salt in water, same thing with gas/liquid/solid thresholds for water under one atmosphere.

So, the approach I proposed is more to create a "targeted process profile of a sustainable process" than "sustainable development target". The information is store in the process profiles themselves.

The issue in this approach is the need to define one or several "sustainable process" to define the targets and assess the other processes to these ones.

[phismith]

I think the problem with this is that 'Targets' are meant to be easily measurable BS

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 12:35 PM, cfrancois7 notifications@github.com wrote:

Yes, I agree it adds an extra layer. In the approach I proposed, the targets are the measures of the process profiles of a process that is a sustainable process, e.g. this process will meet one or more sustainable development goals. For instance, It comes from an experimentation or a simulation and the instance is called the "reference sustainable process". Now, if the measures of the process profiles of a second process are higher (or lower) of this reference sustainable process, then it is a sustainable process by inferences.

My example is inspired from the acid/basic, redox or thermodynamic chemical reactions. Through a lot of experiments or models, it is now possible to draw the diagrams (several process profiles of several experimental processes) on which we define the thresholds of interests, e.g. the ratio of oxidation reactions on reduction ones that induces a dissolution/precipitation of the salt in water, same thing with gas/liquid/solid thresholds for water under one atmosphere.

So, the approach I proposed is more to create a "targeted process profile of a sustainable process" than "sustainable development target". The information is store in the process profiles themselves.

The issue in this approach is the need to define one or several "sustainable process" to define the targets and assess the other processes to these ones.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SDG-InterfaceOntology/sdgio/issues/59#issuecomment-257921138, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AH6qNytGiWw5F7EccUsFJ0y8Y1FjAFUVks5q6LvpgaJpZM4G0csr .

[cfrancois7]

Before to talk about the threshold value, I prefer to define the threshold. I used documents about the sustainable development but ecological oriented.

Quotes from the Seri' study for the European Union,

The thresholds at stake can be directly linked to a state of the environment (e.g. biodiversity level), a pressure (e.g. emissions) and/or to an underlying driving force (e.g. social or economical) made on this state or pressure.

A tolerable level of soil erosion refers to the amount of soil that can be lost per area and year without undermining the soil’s capacity to regenerate. This would constitute a potential threshold for maintaining soil quality

When I read the document, it was clear the threshold is considered as an event, a limit in the process, sometimes called boundary. Thus, one or several indicators were created to assess the phenomenon or give a threshold indicator value to help the policy makers. But the thresholds were always define through models or empirical studies. The approach is: review of models/ scientific literature => threshold phenomena => threshold definition => indicator definition to translate the threshold in few figures and easy measurable => threshold indicator value.

So, if you have one threshold indicator value (the target), this value is based on one threshold phenomena in a process, which is an event and a kind boundary process. Thus, an indicator is created to translate the target that represents the natural irreversible limit.

I proposed that a sustainable development target is about the sustainable development threshold and has part one or a data set of measurement datum. Here, the sustainable development threshold is a boundary process.

What is your point of view? Supposedly I read correctly the document.