Abstract
’Sustainability indicators’ are being used in local communities to serve multiple and sometimes vague or contradictory objectives. This can add to confusion about sustainable development among the public and policy makers. The case of Seattle, USA is used to illustrate how a set of well‐developed indicators can fail to meet their objectives if they are unrelated to a methodical planning process. The cases of the State of Oregon, USA and Santa Monica, USA are then presented to demonstrate how indicators can be used effectively in sustainable development planning to measure performance and to promote positive change. The author concludes that, at the local level, indicators are ideally suited for performance measurement. Indicators are a sub‐optimal tool for technical assessment and even public education. Applications of indicators for these two purposes can compromise the performance measurement function.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
