Developing a participatory impact assessment approach and action research culture within a communication for social change organisation in Nepal

Developing an effective impact evaluation framework, managing and conducting rigorous impact evaluations, and developing a strong research and evaluation culture within development communication organisations presents many challenges. This is especially so when both the community and organisational context is continually changing and the outcomes of programs are complex and difficult to clearly identify.----- This paper presents a case study from a research project being conducted from 2007-2010 that aims to address these challenges and issues, entitled Assessing Communication for Social Change: A New Agenda in Impact Assessment. Building on previous development communication projects which used ethnographic action research, this project is developing, trailing and rigorously evaluating a participatory impact assessment methodology for assessing the social change impacts of community radio programs in Nepal. This project is a collaboration between Equal Access – Nepal (EAN), Equal Access – International, local stakeholders and listeners, a network of trained community researchers, and a research team from two Australian universities. A key element of the project is the establishment of an organisational culture within EAN that values and supports the impact assessment process being developed, which is based on continuous action learning and improvement. The paper describes the situation related to monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and impact assessment before the project began, in which EAN was often reliant on time-bound studies and ‘success stories’ derived from listener letters and feedback. We then outline the various strategies used in an effort to develop stronger and more effective impact assessment and M&E systems, and the gradual changes that have occurred to date. These changes include a greater understanding of the value of adopting a participatory, holistic, evidence-based approach to impact assessment. We also critically review the many challenges experienced in this process, including:----- • Tension between the pressure from donors to ‘prove’ impacts and the adoption of a bottom-up, participatory approach based on ‘improving’ programs in ways that meet community needs and aspirations.----- • Resistance from the content teams to changing their existing M&E practices and to the perceived complexity of the approach.----- • Lack of meaningful connection between the M&E and content teams.----- • Human resource problems and lack of capacity in analysing qualitative data and reporting results.----- • The contextual challenges, including extreme poverty, wide cultural and linguistic diversity, poor transport and communications infrastructure, and political instability.----- • A general lack of acceptance of the importance of evaluation within Nepal due to accepting everything as fate or ‘natural’ rather than requiring investigation into a problem.

Making a case for social impact assessment in urban development : social impacts and legal disputes in Queensland, Australia

Urban land use planning and policy decisions are often contested, with the multiple stakeholders (business, developers, residents, policymakers and the wider community) frequently holding opposing viewpoints about the issues and best solution. In recent years, however, the participatory process of social impact assessment (SIA) has received significant attention as a way to mitigate conflict, facilitating negotiation and conflict resolution. This paper examines how social impacts have informed development appeals in Australia, focussing on ten cases from the Queensland Planning and Environment Court (QPEC). Half are appeals from community members (typically neighbours) wanting to oppose approvals and half from organisations appealing against City Councils’ decisions to deny their development applications. While legal challenges do not necessarily reflect attitudes and practices, they provide a means to begin to assess how social impacts (although not often explicitly defined as such) inform development related disputes. Based on the nature and outcomes of 10 QPEC cases, we argue that many legal cases could have been avoided if SIA had been undertaken appropriately. First, the issues in each case are clearly social, incorporating impacts on amenity, the character of an area, the needs of different social groups, perceptions of risk and a range of other social issues. Second, the outcomes and recommendations from each case, such as negotiating agreements, modifying plans and accommodating community concerns would have been equally served thorough SIA. Our argument is that engagement at an early stage, utilising SIA, could have likely achieved the same result in a less adversarial and much less expensive and time-consuming environment than a legal case.

Developing a sustainability impact assessment framework for local urban planning

In order to meet the land use and infrastructure needs of the community with the additional challenges posed by climate change and a global recession, it is essential that Queensland local governments test their proposed integrated land use and infrastructure plans to ensure the maximum achievement of triple-bottom line sus-tainability goals. Extensive regulatory impact assessment systems are in place at the Australian and state government levels to substantiate and test policy and legislative proposals, however no such requirement has been extended to the local government level. This paper contends that with the devolution of responsibility to local government and growing impacts of local government planning and development assessment activities, impact assessment of regulatory planning instruments is appropriate and overdue. This is particularly so in the Queensland context where local governments manage metropolitan and regional scale responsibilities and their planning schemes under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 integrate land use and infrastructure planning to direct development rights, the spatial allocation of land, and infrastructure investment. It is critical that urban planners have access to fit-for-purpose impact assessment frameworks which support this challenging task and address the important relationship between local planning and sustainable urban development. This paper uses two examples of sustainability impact assessment and a case study from the Queensland local urban planning context to build an argument and potential starting point for impact assessment in local planning processes.

From impact assessment to user-friendly risk management decision-making

In earlier cultures and societies, hazards and risks to human health were dealt with by methods derived from myth, metaphor and ritual. In modem society however, notions of hazard and risk have been transformed from the level of a folk discourse to that of an expert centred concept (Plough & Krimsky, 1987). With the professionalization of risk and hazard analysis came a preferred framework for decision making based on a range of 'technical' methodologies (Giere, 1991 ). This is especially true for decision processes relating to risk assessment and management, and impact assessment. Such approaches however, often entail narrow technical-based theoretical assumptions about human behaviour and the natural world, and the· methods used. They therefore carry 'in-built' error factors that contribute considerable uncertainty to the results.

Motivators and barriers to incorporating climate change-related health risks in environmental health impact assessment

Climate change presents risks to health that must be addressed by both decision-makers and public health researchers. Within the application of Environmental Health Impact Assessment (EHIA), there have been few attempts to incorporate climate change-related health risks as an input to the framework. This study used a focus group design to examine the perceptions of government, industry and academic specialists about the suitability of assessing the health consequences of climate change within an EHIA framework. Practitioners expressed concern over a number of factors relating to the current EHIA methodology and the inclusion of climate change-related health risks. These concerns related to the broad scope of issues that would need to be considered, problems with identifying appropriate health indicators, the lack of relevant qualitative information that is currently incorporated in assessment and persistent issues surrounding stakeholder participation. It was suggested that improvements are needed in data collection processes, particularly in terms of adequate communication between environmental and health practitioners. Concerns were raised surrounding data privacy and usage, and how these could impact on the assessment process. These findings may provide guidance for government and industry bodies to improve the assessment of climate change-related health risks.

The science of assessment : identifying and predicting environmental impacts

The historical challenge of environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been to predict project-based impacts accurately. Both EIA legislation and the practice of EIA have evolved over the last three decades in Canada, and the development of the discipline and science of environmental assessment has improved how we apply environmental assessment to complex projects. The practice of environmental assessment integrates the social and natural sciences and relies on an eclectic knowledge base from a wide range of sources. EIA methods and tools provide a means to structure and integrate knowledge in order to evaluate and predict environmental impacts.----- This Chapter will provide a brief overview of how impacts are identified and predicted. How do we determine what aspect of the natural and social environment will be affected when a mine is excavated? How does the practitioner determine the range of potential impacts, assess whether they are significant, and predict the consequences? There are no standard answers to these questions, but there are established methods to provide a foundation for scoping and predicting the potential impacts of a project.----- Of course, the community and publics play an important role in this process, and this will be discussed in subsequent chapters. In the first part of this chapter, we will deal with impact identification, which involves appplying scoping to critical issues and determining impact significance, baseline ecosystem evaluation techniques, and how to communicate environmental impacts. In the second part of the chapter, we discuss the prediction of impacts in relation to the complexity of the environment, ecological risk assessment, and modelling.

The essential parameters of a resource-based carrying capacity assessment model : an Australian case study

Carrying capacity assessments model a population’s potential self-sufficiency. A crucial first step in the development of such modelling is to examine the basic resource-based parameters defining the population’s production and consumption habits. These parameters include basic human needs such as food, water, shelter and energy together with climatic, environmental and behavioural characteristics. Each of these parameters imparts land-usage requirements in different ways and varied degrees so their incorporation into carrying capacity modelling also differs. Given that the availability and values of production parameters may differ between locations, no two carrying capacity models are likely to be exactly alike. However, the essential parameters themselves can remain consistent so one example, the Carrying Capacity Dashboard, is offered as a case study to highlight one way in which these parameters are utilised. While examples exist of findings made from carrying capacity assessment modelling, to date, guidelines for replication of such studies in other regions and scales have largely been overlooked. This paper addresses such shortcomings by describing a process for the inclusion and calibration of the most important resource-based parameters in a way that could be repeated elsewhere.

A pilot study of the Social Water Assessment Protocol in a mining region of Ghana

The Social Water Assessment Protocol (SWAP) is a tool consisting of a series of questions on fourteen themes designed to capture the social context of water around a mine site. A pilot study of the SWAP, conducted in Prestea-Huni Valley, Ghana, showed that some communities were concerned about whether the groundwater was potable. The mining company’s concern was that there was a cycle of dependency amongst communities that received treated water from the mining company. The pilot identified potential data sources and stakeholder groups for each theme, gaps in themes and suggested refinements to questions to improve the SWAP.

Integrating health and sustainability in life cycle assessment

Until now health impact assessment and environmental impact assessment are two different issues, often not addressed together. Both issues have to be dealt with for sustainable building. The aim of this paper is to link healthy and sustainable housing in life cycle assessment. Two strategies are studied: clean air as a functional unity and health as a quality indicator. The strategies are illustrated with an example on the basis of Eco-Quantum, which is a Dutch whole-building assessment tool. It turns out that both strategies do not conflict with the LCA methodology. The LCA methodology has to be refined for this purpose.

Incorporating an economic model in the health impact assessment approach

The current policy decision making in Australia regarding non-health public investments (for example, transport/housing/social welfare programmes) does not quantify health benefits and costs systematically. To address this knowledge gap, this study proposes an economic model for quantifying health impacts of public policies in terms of dollar value. The intention is to enable policy-makers in conducting economic evaluation of health effects of non-health policies and in implementing policies those reduce health inequalities as well as enhance positive health gains of the target population. Health Impact Assessment (HIA) provides an appropriate framework for this study since HIA assesses the beneficial and adverse effects of a programme/policy on public health and on health inequalities through the distribution of those effects. However, HIA usually tries to influence the decision making process using its scientific findings, mostly epidemiological and toxicological evidence. In reality, this evidence can not establish causal links between policy and health impacts since it can not explain how an individual or a community reacts to changing circumstances. The proposed economic model addresses this health-policy linkage using a consumer choice approach that can explain changes in group and individual behaviour in a given economic set up. The economic model suggested in this paper links epidemiological findings with economic analysis to estimate the health costs and benefits of public investment policies. That is, estimating dollar impacts when health status of the exposed population group changes by public programmes – for example, transport initiatives to reduce congestion by building new roads/ highways/ tunnels etc. or by imposing congestion taxes. For policy evaluation purposes, the model is incorporated in the HIA framework by establishing association among identified factors, which drive changes in the behaviour of target population group and in turn, in the health outcomes. The economic variables identified to estimate the health inequality and health costs are levels of income, unemployment, education, age groups, disadvantaged population groups, mortality/morbidity etc. However, though the model validation using case studies and/or available database from Australian non-health policy (say, transport) arena is in the future tasks agenda, it is beyond the scope of this current paper.

A decision support system for sustainable urban development : the integrated land use and transportation indexing model

The broad definition of sustainable development at the early stage of its introduction has caused confusion and hesitation among local authorities and planning professionals. The main difficulties are experience in employing loosely-defined principles of sustainable development in setting policies and goals. The question of how this theory/rhetoric-practice gap could be filled will be the theme of this study. One of the widely employed sustainability accounting approaches by governmental organisations, triple bottom line, and applicability of this approach to sustainable urban development policies will be examined. When incorporating triple bottom line considerations with the environmental impact assessment techniques, the framework of GIS-based decision support system that helps decision-makers in selecting policy option according to the economic, environmental and social impacts will be introduced. In order to embrace sustainable urban development policy considerations, the relationship between urban form, travel pattern and socio-economic attributes should be clarified. This clarification associated with other input decision support systems will picture the holistic state of the urban settings in terms of sustainability. In this study, grid-based indexing methodology will be employed to visualise the degree of compatibility of selected scenarios with the designated sustainable urban future. In addition, this tool will provide valuable knowledge about the spatial dimension of the sustainable development. It will also give fine details about the possible impacts of urban development proposals by employing disaggregated spatial data analysis (e.g. land-use, transportation, urban services, population density, pollution, etc.). The visualisation capacity of this tool will help decision makers and other stakeholders compare and select alternative of future urban developments.

The comparison of international and local sustainable assessment tools of landscape design for housing estate developments : case of Bangkok Metropolitan Region, Thailand

Various countries have been introducing sustainable assessment tools for real estate design to produce integrated sustainability components not just for the building, but also the landscape component of the development. This paper aims to present the comparison between international and local assessment tools of landscape design for housing estate developments in Bangkok Metropolitan Region (BMR), Thailand. The methodologies used are to review, then compare and identify discrepancy indicators among the tools. This paper will examine four international tools; LEED for Neighbourhood Development (LEED – ND) of United State of America (USA), EnviroDevelopment standards of Australia, Residential Landscape Sustainability of United Kingdom (UK) and Green Mark for Infrastructure of Singapore; and three BMR’s existing tools; Land Subdivision Act B.E. 2543, Environmental Impact Assessment Monitoring Awards (EIA-MA) and Thai’s Rating for Energy and Environmental Sustainability of New construction and major renovation (TREES-NC). The findings show that there are twenty two elements of three categories which are neighbourhood design, community management, and environmental condition. Moreover, only one element in neighbourhood designs different between the international and local tools. The sustainable assessment tools have existed in BMR but they are not complete in only one assessment tool. Thus, the development of new comprehensive assessment tool will be necessary in BMR; however, it should meet the specific environment and climate condition for housing estate development at BMR.