Limitations: the existence of plans does not mean that these plans are being successfully implemented. Comments from the plenary: Several participants highlighted the importance of this indicator and the need for all the countries to have the for its implementation. Mrs. Quiroga pointed that the name of the indicator does not contain the unit of measurement, and the word could be changed to “percentage” “proportion”. 3.1a Proportion of national land area with land-use plans The EIWG agreed to place this indicator in the agreed category and change its name. The respective methodological sheet with the changes introduced and agreed can be found in Annex IV. Indicator 3.1b Average annual variation in land use This indicator was reviewed by: Mrs. Marly Santos Brasil, Mrs. Nelly García , Mr. César – – Rodríguez , Mr. Cirila Gutiérrez , Mrs. Ileana Saborit , and Mr. Álvaro Aguilar . This group – – – – following: observes the It is advisable that the name of the indicator be changed to the following: rate of “Annual change in the various coverages”. A problem has been identified with the unit of measurement not all the countries are using the same categories. The FAO’s categories were missing. In terms of interpretation, variations in the categories of annual land use and vegetation in the country were pointed out. There was enough consensus within the group for it to be approved as agreed. Mrs. Patricia Maccagno () proposed the following name for the indicator: change in land use” and to “Annual reposition it in respect to the goal. The proposal was accepted. 3.1b Annual change in land use The EIWG agreed to place this indicator in the category and change its name. The “agreed” methodological sheet with respect to the changes introduced and agreed on can be found in Annex IV.
Limitations: the existence of plans does not mean that these plans are being successfully implemented. Comments from the plenary: Several participants highlighted the importance of this indicator and the need for all the countries to have the for its implementation. Mrs. Quiroga pointed that the name of the indicator does not contain the unit of measurement, and the word “percentage” could be changed to “proportion”. 3.1a Proportion of national land area with land-use plans The EIWG agreed to place this indicator in the agreed category and change its name. The respective methodological sheet with the changes introduced and agreed can be found in Annex IV. Indicator 3.1b Average annual variation in land use This indicator was reviewed by: Mrs. Marly Santos – Brasil, Mrs. Nelly García – , Mr. César Rodríguez – , Mr. Cirila Gutiérrez – , Mrs. Ileana Saborit – , and Mr. Álvaro Aguilar – . This group observes the following: It is advisable that the name of the indicator be changed to the following: “Annual rate of change in the various coverages”. A problem has been identified with the unit of measurement not all the countries are using the same categories. The FAO’s categories were missing. In terms of interpretation, variations in the categories of annual land use and vegetation in the country were pointed out. There was enough consensus within the group for it to be approved as agreed. Mrs. Patricia Maccagno () proposed the following name for the indicator: “Annual change in land use” and to reposition it in respect to the goal. The proposal was accepted. 3.1b Annual change in land use The EIWG agreed to place this indicator in the category “agreed” and change its name. The methodological sheet with respect to the changes introduced and agreed on can be found in Annex IV.
Report%20WorkshopIndicators%20ENG.docx