Among the 16 common indicator selection criteria summarized in Otto et al. (2018)
five criteria relate to the indicators` performances and require time series for
their evaluation, i.e.
Crit. 8: Development reflects ecosystem change caused by variation in manageable pressure(s)
Crit. 9: Sensitive or responsive to pressures
Crit. 10: Robust, i.e. responses in a predictive fashion, and statistically sound
Crit. 11: Links to management measures (responsiveness and specificity)
Crit. 12: Relates where appropriate to other indicators but is not redundant (not scored)
In this function, the scoring scheme for these criteria as proposed by
Otto et al. (2018) serves as basis for the quantification of the IND performance.
Sensitivity (criterion 9) and robustness (criterion 10) are specified into more detailed
sub-criteria to allow for quantification based on statistical models and rated individually
for every potential pressure that might affect the IND directly or indirectly. In the case
of non-significant relationships between a IND and a specific pressures, sub-crit. 9.1 and
all following pressure-specific sub-crit. in criteria 9 and 10 are scored zero for this
pressure.
The template tibble crit_scores_tmpl
contains all relevant informations and
serves as basis for the scoring in this function. See for more details
crit_scores_tmpl
or View(crit_scores_tmpl)
. The scoring scheme can
easily be adapted to any kind of state indicator and management scheme by modifying
the scores, the weighting of scores or by removing or adding (sub)criteria in the
crit_scores_tmpl
template. The condition
variable can also be modified
but needs to follow the same syntax.