681 Binational Vital Signs: A Quality of Life Indicator Program for the San Diego–Tijuana Metropolitan Region 1 Celeste Murphy-Greene San Diego State University John Blair University of New South Wales Abstract This is a study of a binational community indicator program for the San Diego–Tijuana metropolitan area (SDTMA). The key objective of the research was to produce a citizen-generated community indi- cator program (CIP). The study is closely based on the work of the two focus groups held in the two cities and offers a small program that has immediate practical potential for implementation. The program consists of a suite of thirty-five indicators for which data has been identified and provided. Fifteen of the indicators apply to Tijuana, twenty to San Diego. The program is built around principles of com- munity well-being or quality of life (QOL). It is the first subregional attempt at the scale of the United States-Mexico Bi-National Region (BNR) to integrate existing environmental, social, and economic data into a single coherent program to inform community leaders about the condition of the SDTMA. The region covered by the CIP generally consists of the urbanized core of metropolitan Tijuana, the city of San Diego, and associated cities like Chula Vista and El Cajon within the southern part of San Diego County. Indicators are quantitative or qualitative information presented in a formalized way. They facilitate assessment of the past, current, or future condition of a system (Hodge, 1996). There is nothing new about indicators—they have been used for decades to inform, enlighten, and support policy change. Gross national product, cost of living, and employment statistics are three of the more common national indicators used in many countries. What is innovative is how suites of indicators are used in programs to monitor global, national, and community condition. As a result of the Rio Declaration and commitments to Agenda 21 (United Nations Con- ference on Environment and Development, 1993) several European countries, Canada, and Japan are using sets of indicators at a national scale. Efforts to monitor global conditions have existed for several years, too. The United Nations (UN) coordinates the measurement of problems like greenhouse gas accumulation and ozone depletion; constructs macro-indicators that describe “North” and “South” processes; and has assembled the human development index (HDI) (Henderson, 1994), which aggregates a number of separate indicators into a composite measure. Private organizations like The Economist (London) and The Worldwatch Institute are also important producers of global indicators and data. At the other end of the scale, there has been a proliferation of city-based indi- cator programs. More than two hundred communities around the United States are using suites of indicators in community indicator programs (CIPs) in an attempt to monitor economic and environmental trends and social well-being (Atkinson & Hamilton, 1996; Besleme and Mullin, 1997; Innes & Booher, 1999; Redefining Progress, 1997). The first indicator program in United States in was created in Review of Policy Research, Volume 21, Number 5 (2004) © 2004 by The Policy Studies Association. All rights reserved.