PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Composite indices have been widely used to rank the environmental performance of nations. Such environmental indices can be useful in communicating complex information as a single value and have the potential to generate political and media awareness of environmental issues. However, poorly constructed, or poorly communicated indices, can hinder efforts to identify environmental failings, and there are considerable differences in rank among existing environmental indices. Here, we provide a review of the conceptual frameworks and methodological choices used for existing environmental indices to enhance our understanding of their accuracy and applicability. In the present study, we review existing global indices according to their conceptual framework (objectives of the index and set of indicators included) and methodological choices made in their construction (e.g., weighting and aggregation). We examine how differences in conceptual frameworks and methodology may yield a more, or less, optimistic view of a country\'s environment. Our results indicate that (1) multidimensional environmental indices with indicators related to human health and welfare or policy are positively correlated; (2) environment-only indices are positively correlated with one another or are not correlated at all; (3) multidimensional indices and environment-only indices are negatively correlated with each other or are not correlated at all. This indicates that the conceptual frameworks and indicators included may influence a country\'s rank among different environmental indices. Our results highlight that, when choosing an existing environmental index-or developing a new one-it is important to assess whether the conceptual framework (and associated indicators) and methodological choices are appropriate for the phenomenon being measured and reported on. This is important because the inclusion of confounding indicators in environmental indices may provide a misleading view of the quality of a country\'s environment.
摘要：
综合指数已被广泛用于对国家的环境绩效进行排名。这种环境指数可用于将复杂的信息作为单一价值传达，并有可能引起政治和媒体对环境问题的认识。然而,构造差,或沟通不良的指数，可能会阻碍识别环境缺陷的努力，现有环境指数之间的排名差异很大。这里,我们对现有环境指数的概念框架和方法选择进行了审查，以增强我们对其准确性和适用性的理解。在本研究中,我们根据现有的全球指数的概念框架(包括指数的目标和指标集)和构建方法的选择(例如，加权和聚合)。我们研究了概念框架和方法的差异如何产生更多的，或更少，对一个国家的环境持乐观态度。我们的结果表明：（1）多维环境指数与与人类健康和福利或政策相关的指标呈正相关；（2）仅环境指数彼此呈正相关或根本不相关；（3）多维指数与仅环境指数彼此呈负相关或根本不相关。这表明所包含的概念框架和指标可能会影响一个国家在不同环境指数中的排名。我们的结果强调，在选择现有环境指数或制定新的环境指数时，重要的是评估概念框架(和相关指标)和方法选择是否适合正在衡量和报告的现象。这一点很重要，因为在环境指数中纳入混杂指标可能会对一个国家的环境质量产生误导。
