Journal of Mountain Science

, Volume 4, Issue 4, pp 321–330 | Cite as

A framework for selecting indicators to assess the sustainable development of the natural heritage site

  • Wei Jie Email author
  • Zhao Yongtao 
  • Xu Houqin 
  • Yu Hui 


Sustainable world heritage management represents an approach for managing the resources of a property by integrating environmental, economic, and social issues. It aims to provide sustainable benefits for future generations, while protect the property and minimize the possible adverse social, economic and environmental impacts. Indicators of sustainable development, which summarize information for decision-making, are invaluable to learn the efficiency and effectiveness of property management. Scientists in many fields devised several conceptual models of environmental statistics and indicators, of which, DPSIR (Driving forces — Pressure — State — Impact — Response) is thought to be the best available one in identifying and developing indicators of sustainable development. Based on the DPSIR conceptual model and indicator selection criteria, the present paper proposed a methodology framework for selecting indicators to assess the sustainable development of a natural heritage site. The proposed framework included a multi-level hierarchical structure for various indicators and indexes, a modified DPSIR frame to identify key issues in property management and a set of indicators for evaluating the sustainability in Sichuan Giant Panda Sanctuaries.


Sustainable development natural heritage DPSIR conceptual model Giant Panda Sanctuary indicator 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bagheri, A., and Hjorth P. 2007. A Framework for Process Indicators to Monitor for Sustainable Development: Practice to an Urban Water System. Environment, Development and Sustainability 9: 143–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carley, M., and Christie, J. 1993. Managing Sustainable Development Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  3. CEC (Commission of the European Communities). 2000. Indicators for the integration of environmental concerns into the common agricultural policy (COM (2000) 20 Final). Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Brussels.Google Scholar
  4. CHEN Fubin, ZHAO Yongtao, LAN Libo. 2002. Discussion on the value of world heritage for Jiajin Mountains Giant Panda habitat of Sichuan. Journal of mountain science 20(6): 687–694. (In Chinese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  5. EEA. 1999. State and pressures of the marine and coastal Mediterranean environment. European Environment Agency, Environment Assessment Series (5): 137.Google Scholar
  6. EEA. 2000. Down to earth: soil degradation and sustainable development in Europe. Environmental Issues Series, vol. 16. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen. Pp 32.Google Scholar
  7. Erhard M., Van Minnen J., Voigt T. 2002. Proposed core set of climate change state and impact indicators in Europe. Technical report no. XX. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  8. Gobin A., Jones R., Kirkby M. et al. 2004. Indicators for pan-European assessment and monitoring of soil erosion by water. Environmental Science and Policy 7: 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Human Use of NWHS (Human Use of Natural World Heritage Sites): A global overview 2001. (Accessed at July 17, 2001)
  10. LIU Jianguo, OUYANG Zhiyuan, Taylor W.W. 1999. A framework for evaluating the effects of human factors on wildlife habitat: the case of Giant Pandas. Conservation Biology 13: 1360–1370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. LIU Jianguo, Linderman M., OUYANG Zhiyuan et al. 2001. Ecological degradation in protected areas: The case of Wolong Nature Reserve for giant pandas. Science 292: 98–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. LV Yihe, CHEN Liding, FU Bojie et al. 2003. A framework for evaluating the effectiveness of protected areas: the case of Wolong Biosphere Reserve. Landscape and Urban Planning 63(4): 213–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Miller G. and Twining-Ward L. 2005. Monitoring for a Sustainable Tourism Transition: The Challenge of Developing and Using Indicators. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Niemeijer D., Groot R.S. 2006. Framing environmental indicators: moving from causal chains to causal networks. Environment, Development and Sustainability, DOI 10.1007/s10668-006-9040-9.Google Scholar
  15. OECD. 1993. OECD core set of indicators for environmental performance reviews. OECD Environment Monographs No. 83, OECD, Paris.Google Scholar
  16. OECD. 2002. Sustainable Development: Indicators to measure decoupling of environmental pressure from economic growth. (Accessed at 25 July, 2004)Google Scholar
  17. Pirrone N., Trombino G., Cinnirella S. et al. 2005. The Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) approach for integrated catchment-coastal zone management: preliminary application to the Po catchment-Adriatic Sea coastal zone system. Regional environmental change (5):111–137.Google Scholar
  18. Shah R. 2000. International Frameworks of Environmental Statistics and Indicators. Inception Workshop on the Institutional Strengthening and Collection of Environment Statistics, Samarkand.Google Scholar
  19. Smeets E., Weterings R. 1999. Environmental indicators: typology and overview. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  20. Turner, R. K. 1988. Sustainable Environmental Management: Principles and Practice. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
  21. UNCSD. 1996. Indicators of Sustainable Development: Framework and Methodologies, New York, United Nations.Google Scholar
  22. UNESCO/WH Centre. 2005. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Paris, France.Google Scholar
  23. UNESCO/WH Centre. 2007. (Accessed at 25 July, 2007)
  24. Walmsley J. 2002. Framework for Measuring Sustainable Development in Catchment Systems. Environmental Management 29(2): 195–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. WEI Jie, TIAN Junliang, HE Xiubin, 2005. Decoupling indicators of soil erosion for agro-ecosystem assessment. Agrifood Research Reports 68: 32–42Google Scholar
  26. Wilbanks, T. 1994. “Sustainable Development” in Geographic Perspective. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 84(4):541–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wei Jie 
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Zhao Yongtao 
    • 1
  • Xu Houqin 
    • 1
  • Yu Hui 
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Mountain Hazards and EnvironmentChinese Academy of SciencesChengduChina
  2. 2.Graduate University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations