July 2006 

RESULTS OF MCC’S SEARCH FOR A 

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INDICATOR

In its authorizing legislation, MCC is required to evaluate country performance in a variety of 

specific policy areas through objective and quantifiable indicators to the maximum extent 

possible. One of these is a country's demonstrated commitment to economic policies that 

promote the sustainable management of natural resources. To this end, MCC has, from 2004 to 

2006, provided its Board of Directors with supplemental quantitative and qualitative information 

about each country’s performance in this area. At the same time, however, MCC has been

seeking a single indicator or index of natural resource management that would meet its criteria 

for a selection indicator and satisfy its legislative mandate. For more information on the criteria 

for selection indicators, see MCC’s Natural Resource Working Group Fact Sheet (June 2005). 

In February 2005, MCC launched a public process, spearheaded by MCC Board Member 

Governor Christine Todd Whitman, to seek broad input from experts and key stakeholders in the 

environmental community. In the search for a natural resource management indicator, MCC 

consulted extensively with a broad range of environmental experts, think tanks, NGOs, scholars, 

the Congress, and various US government

agencies. MCC invited experts with a range 

of experience to participate in a Natural 

Resources Working Group and to provide 

input into the process by identifying available 

indicators, formally proposing new or existing 

indicators, or serving as an expert evaluator 

for proposals received by MCC. Throughout 

this process, MCC researched and catalogued

over 120 potential natural resource indicators. 

In July 2005, MCC issued a public “call for 

ideas” for an indicator and assembled a group 

of economists and natural resources 

management experts to help evaluate the 

proposals received. MCC and its group of 

expert evaluators concluded their review of all 

the submissions in June 2006. 

Public Outreach in Conjunction with the 

Brookings Institution 

Many of those initially consulted suggested that

MCC should convene several experts in this field

to take stock of existing and emerging research 

and to discuss the merits and shortcomings of 

potential indicators. In response, MCC worked

with The Brookings Institution to bring together 

some of the top experts in the field of natural 

resources management, environmental indicators, and environmental economics in June

2005. The group debated the nature of several 

potential indicators, and MCC concluded the 

forum by announcing a formal “call for ideas” 

from the experts and general public. MCC also

introduced the individuals who had volunteered 

to serve as independent expert evaluators. 

NEXT STEPS

The two indicators receiving the highest scores were a Natural Resource Management Index

from Columbia University’s Center for International Earth Science Information Network 

(CIESIN) and the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, and an Access to Land

indicator from the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). Additional 

information on these indices is provided on the following page. MCC is conducting technical 

and other consultations with various experts, stakeholders, and with the institutions that produce 
these indicators to assess the potential application of the indicators to MCC’s selection process.

MCC expects to make a recommendation in August 2006 to its Board of Directors about all 

indicators, including a natural resource management indicator, to be used for the Fiscal Year 

2007 annual selection cycle. 

OVERVIEW: “NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT” INDEX

Columbia University’s Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) 

and the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy have proposed a composite measure 

of natural resource management comprised of four indicators: 

• Eco-region Protection: Developed by CIESIN, this indicator assesses whether a country 

is protecting at least 10% of all of its biomes (e.g. deserts, forests, grasslands, aquatic, 

and tundra.). It is designed to capture the comprehensiveness of a government’s 

commitment to habitat preservation and biodiversity protection. World Wildlife Fund 

provides the underlying eco-region data, and the United Nations Environment Program 

World Conservation Monitoring Center – in partnership with the IUCN World 

Commission on Protected Areas and the World Database on Protected Areas 

Consortium – provide the underlying data on protected areas. 

• Access to Improved Sanitation: Produced by WHO and UNICEF, this indicator 

measures the percentage of the population with access to facilities that hygienically 

separate human excreta from human, animal and insect contact. Facilities such as sewers 

or septic tanks, poor-flush latrines and simple pit or ventilated improved pit latrines are

assumed to be adequate, provided that they are not public. 

• Access to Improved Water: Produced by WHO and UNICEF, this indicator measures 

the percentage of the population with access to at least 20 liters of water per person per 

day from an “improved” source (household connections, public standpipes, boreholes, 

protected dug wells, protected springs, and rainwater collection) within one kilometer of

the user's dwelling. 

• Child Mortality (Ages 1-4): Produced by the Population Division of the United Nations 

Department of Economic and Social Affairs, this indicator measures the probability of a 

child dying between the ages of 1 and 4. Because the causes of child mortality among 1-

4 year olds are predominantly environmental, this indicator is considered to be an 

excellent proxy for underlying environmental conditions.

This composite indicator is consistent with MCC’s legislative mandate because it evaluates 

government commitment to sound management of water resources and water systems, proper 

sewage disposal and sanitary control, air quality standards, habitat preservation, and 

biodiversity protection. For more, please see: www.yale.edu/epi/ and 

http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/es/epi/ . 
OVERVIEW: “ACCESS TO LAND” INDICATOR

The International Fund for Agricultural Development’s (IFAD) “Access to Land” indicator, a 

component of its Performance Based Allocation System, assesses the existence of an 

institutional, legal, and market framework for secure land tenure. Specifically, it measures the 

extent to which:

• “a range of land access mechanisms is available to rural poor households, including 

women, indigenous populations and other vulnerable groups, and their land access is 

generally secure;” 

• “the law guarantees secure, equal, and enforceable land rights to poor men and 

women;” 

• “the majority of land holdings are titled and/or registered;” 

• “formal land markets [the free buying, selling, and renting of private land] function 

effectively and are used by the rural poor;” and 

• “the government has a policy for the clear and equitable allocation and management

of common property resources.” 

This indicator is consistent with MCC’s legislative mandate because research indicates that 

secure land tenure facilitates long-term investments in land productivity and diminishes the 

likelihood of short-term actions with negative environmental impacts such as deforestation. 

For more on IFAD’s indicator methodology, see: www.ifad.org/gbdocs/gc/27/e/GC-27-L6.pdf . The 2004 IFAD country scores are at: www.ifad.org /gbdocs/gc/28/e/GC-28-L-9.pdf