Circular TG-0.7 · Section 0: Concepts, Definitions and Front Matter · 1 September 2026
Quality Assurance Principles
Explains the quality assurance principles that apply across all ocean accounting work, and how to document and review compiled accounts.
1. Outcome
Section titled “1. Outcome”After reading this Circular, you will understand the quality assurance principles that apply across all ocean accounting work. These principles cover data quality dimensions, uncertainty categories, and documentation standards, and are referenced by all other circulars in the Technical Guidance.
2. Requirements
Section titled “2. Requirements”Essential prerequisites:
- TG-0.1 General Introduction to Ocean Accounts — for the conceptual framework and the three-domain structure of Ocean Accounts
Helpful background:
- TG-0.2 Overview of Relevant Statistical Standards — for the SEEA EA quality dimensions and statistical standards referenced throughout
3. Guidance Material
Section titled “3. Guidance Material”3.1 Purpose of Quality Assurance
Section titled “3.1 Purpose of Quality Assurance”Ocean accounts integrate data from diverse sources: environmental monitoring, economic statistics, social surveys, geospatial observations, and customary knowledge systems. Each source has different quality characteristics, and accounts compilation must address those differences systematically through the principles set out in this Circular.
3.2 Six Dimensions of Data Quality
Section titled “3.2 Six Dimensions of Data Quality”The SEEA EA identifies six dimensions of data quality relevant to environmental-economic accounting, plus the quality of the institutional environment in which the data are compiled (para. 2.86; see Section 3.3). The six dimensions apply directly to ocean accounts:
3.2.1 Relevance
Section titled “3.2.1 Relevance”Definition: The degree to which the data serve to address the purposes for which they are sought by users.
Ocean accounts considerations:
- Do the accounts address the policy questions being asked?
- Are the spatial and temporal resolutions appropriate for the intended use?
- Are the ecosystem types and economic sectors adequately disaggregated?
Example: An ocean account designed to inform marine spatial planning needs fine spatial resolution, whilst one supporting national budget processes may require less geographic detail but more reliable monetary estimates.
3.2.2 Timeliness
Section titled “3.2.2 Timeliness”Definition: The length of time between the data reference period and availability of the information.
Ocean accounts considerations:
- How current are the environmental monitoring data?
- Are there lags between economic activity and its recording in accounts?
- How frequently are accounts updated?
Example: Satellite-derived ecosystem extent data may be available within months, whilst large-scale economic surveys may have 1-2 year lags.
3.2.3 Accuracy
Section titled “3.2.3 Accuracy”Definition: The degree to which the data correctly describe the phenomena they were designed to measure.
Ocean accounts considerations:
- What are the measurement errors in environmental monitoring?
- How reliable are sampling-based estimates of fish stocks or ecosystem condition?
- What are the error margins for economic survey data?
Example: Fish stock assessments may have wide confidence intervals. Accounts should report those intervals alongside the point estimate.
3.2.4 Coherence
Section titled “3.2.4 Coherence”Definition: The degree to which data from different sources or compiled using different methods can be reliably combined and compared.
Ocean accounts considerations:
- Are classifications consistently applied across data sources?
- Are spatial boundaries aligned between environmental and economic data?
- Are accounting periods synchronised?
- Are changes in accounts over time attributable to genuine change rather than methodological or classification revisions? Breaks-in-series should be documented and, where feasible, back-casted (compilers should consult the relevant Section 3 accounts compilation circular for revisions practice specific to each account type).
Example: Economic data by industry may not align perfectly with spatially-defined ecosystem service flows, so bridging tables may be needed.
3.2.5 Interpretability
Section titled “3.2.5 Interpretability”Definition: The availability of information to help users understand and properly use the data.
Ocean accounts considerations:
- Are methods and assumptions clearly documented?
- Are metadata standards applied?
- Are definitions consistent with international standards?
Example: Accounts should specify how services were measured and which ecosystem service classification is used, for example CICES V5.2 or the SEEA EA Reference List of Ecosystem Services (see SEEA EA Annex 6.1). For SEEA EA accounts, the SEEA EA Reference List is the primary classification, and CICES V5.2 may be used as a complementary mapping.1
3.2.6 Accessibility
Section titled “3.2.6 Accessibility”Definition: The ease with which users can access and use the data.
Ocean accounts considerations:
- Are accounts published in accessible formats?
- Are underlying data available for users who need more detail?
- Are there access restrictions (e.g., for confidential business data)?
Example: Accounts may be published in summary form with detailed underlying data available on request or through data portals.
3.3 Institutional Environment
Section titled “3.3 Institutional Environment”Beyond the six dimensions of data quality, the SEEA EA emphasises the quality of the institutional environment in which data are compiled (para. 2.86), consistent with the UN Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics (Resolution 2013/21):
- Independence: Statistical compilation free from political interference
- Mandate: Clear legal or institutional authority for accounts production
- Resources: Adequate funding and staffing
- Coordination: Effective arrangements between data-producing agencies
- Standards: Adherence to international statistical standards and principles
3.4 Four Categories of Uncertainty
Section titled “3.4 Four Categories of Uncertainty”The SEEA EA identifies four categories of uncertainty particularly pertinent to ecosystem accounting (paras. 2.90—2.94).2 All apply directly to ocean accounts:
3.4.1 Physical Measurement Uncertainty
Section titled “3.4.1 Physical Measurement Uncertainty”Uncertainty related to the physical measurement of ecosystem services and ecosystem assets.
Sources in ocean accounts:
- Sampling variability in fish stock surveys
- Remote sensing classification errors
- Spatial interpolation between monitoring stations
- Temporal variability between observations
Approaches to address:
- Report confidence intervals where available
- Document sampling design and coverage
- Use ensemble methods or multiple data sources
- Distinguish between measurement precision and accuracy
3.4.2 Valuation Uncertainty
Section titled “3.4.2 Valuation Uncertainty”Uncertainty in the valuation of ecosystem services and ecosystem assets.
Sources in ocean accounts:
- Choice of valuation method (market prices, replacement cost, stated preference)
- Benefit transfer from other contexts
- Discount rate selection for asset values
- Treatment of non-marginal changes
Benefit transfer introduces additional uncertainty where the study site and policy context differ substantially from the transfer site, so applicability conditions should be assessed and documented (see Section 3.5.4 Assumptions Made, and SEEA EA paras. 5.38—5.41).
Approaches to address:
- Report physical accounts alongside monetary values
- Use sensitivity analysis for key assumptions
- Document valuation method selection rationale
- Present ranges rather than point estimates for contested values
3.4.3 Ecosystem Dynamics Uncertainty
Section titled “3.4.3 Ecosystem Dynamics Uncertainty”Uncertainty related to the dynamics of ecosystems and changes in flows.
Sources in ocean accounts:
- Non-linear ecosystem responses to pressures
- Threshold effects and regime shifts
- Cumulative and synergistic impacts
- Climate change effects on baselines
Approaches to address:
- Use scenario analysis where trends are uncertain
- Document known ecological thresholds
- Update reference conditions as understanding improves
- Link accounts to ecosystem monitoring programmes
3.4.4 Future Prices and Values Uncertainty
Section titled “3.4.4 Future Prices and Values Uncertainty”Uncertainty regarding future prices and values.
Sources in ocean accounts:
- Future market conditions for ocean products
- Changing social preferences for ecosystem services
- Policy changes affecting resource access or use
- Technological change affecting substitution possibilities
Approaches to address:
- Use current prices for flow accounts
- Apply sensitivity analysis for asset valuations
- Document assumptions about future conditions
- Update valuations periodically
3.5 Documentation Requirements
Section titled “3.5 Documentation Requirements”The SEEA EA closes its discussion of uncertainty by stating that all accounting work should document the scope of measurement, the definitions applied, the methods used, and the assumptions made (para. 2.95). Table 3.5.1 (below) maps these four documentation categories to the phases of the Generic Statistical Business Process Model (GSBPM v5.2).
| Documentation category | GSBPM mapping | Key content |
|---|---|---|
| Scope of measurement | Phase 1 — Specify Needs | Geographic, temporal, thematic coverage; inclusions and exclusions |
| Definitions applied | Phase 2 — Design | Ecosystem type definitions; industry/product classifications; alignment with international standards |
| Methods used | Phase 5 — Process | Data sources; compilation procedures; valuation approaches; spatial analysis; gap-filling |
| Assumptions made | Phase 5 — Process | Key assumptions underlying estimates; sensitivity of results; known biases; expert judgement basis. Sensitivity analysis results: also Phase 8 — Evaluate |
3.5.1 Scope of Measurement
Section titled “3.5.1 Scope of Measurement”- Geographic coverage (EEZ, coastal zone, specific regions)
- Temporal coverage (accounting period, time series extent)
- Thematic coverage (ecosystem types, economic sectors, asset categories)
- What is included and excluded, with rationale
3.5.2 Definitions Applied
Section titled “3.5.2 Definitions Applied”- Ecosystem type definitions and classification used
- Industry and product classifications
- Asset boundary definitions (e.g., treatment of aquaculture)
- Alignment with international standards (or departures with justification)
3.5.3 Methods Used
Section titled “3.5.3 Methods Used”- Data sources and collection methods
- Compilation procedures and algorithms
- Valuation approaches (for monetary accounts)
- Spatial analysis methods
- Gap-filling and estimation procedures
3.5.4 Assumptions Made
Section titled “3.5.4 Assumptions Made”- Key assumptions underlying estimates
- Sensitivity of results to assumption changes
- Known biases and their direction
- Expert judgement employed and its basis
3.6 Quality Flags for Accounts Tables
Section titled “3.6 Quality Flags for Accounts Tables”Table 3.6.1 sets out a recommended flagging system for ocean accounts tables.
| Flag | Meaning | Description |
|---|---|---|
| A | High quality | Based on comprehensive data; low uncertainty |
| B | Acceptable quality | Based on representative data; moderate uncertainty |
| C | Use with caution | Limited data; significant uncertainty; may be revised |
| P | Provisional | Preliminary estimate; will be revised when data available |
| E | Estimated | Derived from models or benefit transfer; not direct measurement |
| X | Suppressed | Data withheld for confidentiality or quality reasons |
| n/a | Not applicable | Concept does not apply to this cell |
| .. | Not available | Data not collected or not yet compiled |
Note: the “n/a” symbol replaces the double-hyphen form used in some earlier drafts. The double hyphen (--) is reserved for em-dashes in circular prose.
When account aggregates are derived from cells carrying different flags, the aggregate should carry the flag of the lowest-quality input (e.g., an aggregate of A and C cells carries flag C). Where the lowest-quality input contributes less than 5% of the aggregate value, compilers may exercise judgement and document the rationale.
3.7 Quality Improvement Strategies
Section titled “3.7 Quality Improvement Strategies”Table 3.7.1 summarises four complementary strategies for progressive improvement of ocean accounts over time.
| Strategy | Key actions |
|---|---|
| Prioritised development | Focus initial efforts on highest-priority policy questions; accept provisional estimates where data are limited; build comprehensive accounts progressively. |
| User feedback | Engage data users in identifying quality priorities; track how accounts are used in decision-making; respond to user-identified gaps and issues. |
| Data source development | Work with data providers to improve underlying data; coordinate timing of surveys and monitoring; invest in new data collection where gaps are critical. |
| Method enhancement | Adopt improved methods as they become available; participate in international methodological development; share innovations with other countries. |
3.7.1 Global Consultation on the Technical Guidance
Section titled “3.7.1 Global Consultation on the Technical Guidance”The quality improvement strategies above apply to the ocean accounts that countries compile. The GOAP Technical Guidance itself is subject to an equivalent quality assurance process: each circular is developed and published through a structured Circular Review and Global Consultation that applies the same principles of transparency, attribution, and documentation set out in Section 3.5 to the guidance documents. A circular passes through five phases over approximately eleven weeks (Table 3.7.2).
| Phase | Timing | Activities |
|---|---|---|
| 1 — Draft | Weeks 1—3 | A lead author prepares the draft and completes a self-check against the style guide and these quality assurance principles. |
| 2 — Review | Weeks 4—5 | A panel of three to five subject reviewers assesses the draft and produces a consolidated review summary. |
| 3 — Comment | Weeks 6—8 | The draft is published for open global consultation. Any reader may select a passage and submit a line-anchored comment, tagged by type, optionally proposing an alternative, and attributed to the contributor. Comments are debated through threaded replies with status tags within a time-boxed window, and the lead author responds. A decision gate then checks whether all comments are resolved: unresolved items return to the author, whilst resolved drafts pass to the Secretariat. |
| 4 — Finalise | Weeks 9—10 | The Secretariat adjudicates outstanding comments, finalises the text, and locks the version. |
| 5 — Release | Week 11 | Contributors are credited, the circular is published, and the comment record is archived. |
Four roles carry the process: the lead author (drafts and responds to comments), the review panel (reviews and summarises), a moderator (routes comments and escalates unresolved items), and the Secretariat (adjudicates, finalises, and publishes). The consultation is conducted openly. Comments are publicly visible while the window is open, and the full comment record is retained as a public archive (logged to an annex of the circular). Escalations are logged, and any rejected suggestion is accompanied by a documented justification. Draft circulars open for consultation are presented with an inline commenting overlay that lets readers select text and submit feedback directly on the page (see, for example, the TG-0.2 consultation page).
3.8 Tiered Implementation Frameworks
Section titled “3.8 Tiered Implementation Frameworks”Throughout the GOAP Technical Guidance, tiered implementation frameworks are used to indicate graduated approaches calibrated to available data and institutional capacity. Tier designations are circular-specific, as each circular defines the tiers appropriate to its subject matter. In all cases Tier 1 represents the minimum viable approach, whilst higher tiers represent more rigorous methods requiring greater capacity or data availability. Compilers should select the tier consistent with their data availability and intended account use, and may progress to higher tiers as capacity develops.
3.9 Circular-Specific QA Guidance
Section titled “3.9 Circular-Specific QA Guidance”Table 3.9.1 maps circulars in Sections 3 and 4 to the quality assurance focus of their topic. TG-4.1 to TG-4.6 each include a section on data quality or quality assurance. TG-3.1 to TG-3.5 and TG-4.7 have no dedicated quality assurance section (TG-3.5 discusses uncertainties and risks in its Section 5); for these topics, the principles in this Circular apply directly.
| Circular | QA focus |
|---|---|
| TG-3.1 Asset accounts | Stock measurements |
| TG-3.2 Flows from environment to economy | Ecosystem service flows |
| TG-3.3 Economic activity | Ocean economy statistics |
| TG-3.4 Flows from economy to environment | Pressure data |
| TG-3.5 Social accounts | Social indicators |
| TG-4.1 Remote sensing | Geospatial data |
| TG-4.2 Survey methods | Survey-based data |
| TG-4.3 Administrative data | Administrative sources |
| TG-4.4 Citizen science | Community-based monitoring data |
| TG-4.5 Research data | Integrating research data into official statistics |
| TG-4.6 Data harmonisation | Data harmonisation and interoperability |
| TG-4.7 Data coordination | National data coordination architectures |
4. Acknowledgements
Section titled “4. Acknowledgements”Authors: [To be confirmed]
Reviewers: [To be confirmed]
This circular draws on quality assurance frameworks from the SEEA EA (Chapter 2), the UN Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics, and the Generic Statistical Business Process Model (GSBPM).
5. References
Section titled “5. References”-
United Nations. (2021). System of Environmental-Economic Accounting — Ecosystem Accounting, Chapter 2: Principles of ecosystem accounting. Paragraphs 2.86-2.95.
-
United Nations Economic and Social Council. (2013). Resolution 2013/21: Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics.
-
UNECE. (2025). Generic Statistical Business Process Model (GSBPM), Version 5.2.
-
SEEA. (2022). SEEA Ecosystem Accounting Glossary.
Footnotes
Section titled “Footnotes”-
CICES V5.2 is available at https://cices.eu. The SEEA EA Reference List of Ecosystem Services appears in SEEA EA Annex 6.1 and is the standard classification for SEEA ecosystem accounts. ↩
-
The four categories correspond to SEEA EA paras. 2.91 (physical measurement), 2.92 (valuation), 2.93 (ecosystem dynamics), and 2.94 (future prices and values) respectively. ↩