Evaluating the Social Impacts of Change in a Sustainable Future

1. Evaluating the Social Impacts of Change in a Sustainable Future Professor Ronald McQuaid Employment Research Institute Napier University Edinburgh, Scotland WASD conference, Brighton 27-29 August 2008

2. Sustainable Development • Three Pillars of Sustainability • Environmental • Economic • Social

3. Environmental and Economic Sustainability Environmental – Well established but areas of disagreement Economic - Reasonably well developed, but still very general and not exact: e.g. Cost Benefit Analysis Project Appraisal Private v Social costs, discount rates, weak substitutability etc. Concerned often with economic growth Sustainability indicators have predominantly focused on environmental issues and small scale

4. Overview • What is Social Sustainability? • Why is there interest in SSD? - EU policy context • Developing and measuring SSD

5. Social Sustainability • No agreed definition: a society that has social justice, is persistent and thrives ….. • “Development (and/or growth) that is compatible with harmonious evolution of civil society, fostering an environment conductive to the compatible cohabitation of culturally and socially diverse groups while at the same time encouraging social integration, with improvements in the quality of life for all segments of the population.” Polese and Stren (2000, 15-16)

6. Social Sustainability • Some characteristics and issues: • Quality of life issues • Equality and social justice • Fair distribution of benefits and costs • Access to social resources to allow them to participate fully in society • Individuals have opportunity to reach full potential and overcome disadvantage • Promotes diversity while being inclusive

7. Social Sustainability ( cont.) • Promotes good governance • Multi-generational timescale • Primarily implemented and measured at the local community level • Importantly it is multi-dimensional (difficult/ impossible to get a single measure such as monetarisation measure)

8. SSD is about: • Social impacts of SD policies • Social input and involvement i.e. SIA is not just the inclusion of the social impacts of Sustainable Development policies It is also about how policies are developed and implemented and who influences these

9. European Union Policy Background 1 • Background : UN Agenda 21 • The Lisbon Strategy (introduces social dimension, especially related to work) 2000 (re-launched 2005) • Gothenburg Strategy 2001

10. Lisbon Strategy pillars (2000/5): • An economic pillar preparing the ground for the transition to a competitive, dynamic, knowledge-based economy. Emphasis is placed on the need to adapt constantly to changes in the information society and to boost research and development. • A social pillar designed to modernise the European social model by investing in human resources and combating social exclusion. The Member States are expected to invest in education and training, and to conduct an active policy for employment, making it easier to move to a knowledge economy. • An environmental pillar, added at the Gothenburg European Council meeting, which draws attention to the fact that economic growth must be decoupled from the use of natural resources.

11. European Union Policy Background 2 European Union Sustainable Development Strategy 2006 • Climate change and clean energy • Sustainable transport • Sustainable consumption & production • Conservation and management of natural resources • Public Health • Social inclusion, demography and migration • Global poverty and sustainable development challenges

12. Sustainable Development StrategyPara 56 (2007) • Sustainable development is a fundamental objective of the European Union…It agrees that the objectives and priorities under the seven key challenges … • The strategy uses a baseline of statistics for the year 2000 against which to measure progress and Eurostat produces monitoring reports

13. European Union Policy Background 3 • Social Agenda 2005-2010 The EU's goals include sustained economic growth, more and better jobs and greater social cohesion. Balance with SDS? • European Employment Strategy (first in 1997) and the Luxembourg Process “open method of co-ordination” - multi-lateral surveillance, based on annual reporting and comparable monitoring indicators, so best performers in the EU identified and learned from, plus improved exchanges of information between Member States

15. Developing and measuring SSD • Governance (public participation, social inclusion, and public attitudes) • Employment (at the local community level) • Community Development (local social benefits derived from community participation in commercial activities and policy) • Health and Well-being (physical health & emotional sense of enjoying and achieving in life) • Culture and Heritage

16. Impact Categories/Issues (cont.) Cross-cutting all issues: • distribution of social benefits and costs • participation of affected people in decisions • equality • social justice

17. Governance(public participation, social inclusion, and public attitudes) Questions include, how does the policy: • impact on the involvement of groups and stakeholders to participate in governance? • impact on social institutions or public institutions and administrations in their ability and responsibilities to governance? • impact on a group or the individual’s access to the legal justice system? • impact on the public being informed about issues within their community? • impact on the privacy of individuals and households?

18. Modelling Social Impacts • EU (2006) Report identified 27 different methodologies and techniques • Identify the social impacts of a policy, who is affected and the timescale • Causal Model • Qualitative Assessment • Impact Matrix • Measuring factors such as wellbeing?

19. Modelling Social Impacts 2 • Many sustainability assessments take a ‘triple bottom line’ – start with environment and add on economic and social impacts • Problem - perceives three as independent from each other (gains or losses from each can be exchanged to achieve the optimal policy). Falls short of the holistic approach of multi-dimensional policy assessment

20. Balance Sheet Approach • There is no common matrix by which all social impact issues can be measured! • History of ignoring issues that could not be quantified numerically or monetarised List all benefits/gains v. all costs/losses • Consider distributional effects, equality and social justice • Weighting of measures

21. Indicators e.g. Rio Earth Summit 1992 indicators, Colantonio (2007) etc. Social 1. Access to resources 2. Community needs ( e.g. are communities able to articulate their needs?) 3. Conflicts mitigation 4. Cultural promotion 5. Education 6. Elderly and aging 7. Enabling knowledge management (including access to E-knowledge) 8. Freedom 9. Gender equity 10. Happiness 11. Health 12. Identity of the community/civic pride 13. Image transformation and neighbourhood perceptions

22. Indicators Social cont. 14. Integration of newcomers (especially foreign in-migrants) and residents 15. Leadership 16. Justice and equality 17. Leisure and sport facilities 18. Less able people 19. Population change 20. Poverty eradication 21. Quality of Life 22. Security and Crime 23. Skills development 24. Social diversity and multiculturalism 25. Well being

23. Indicators Socio-Institutional 26. Capacity Building 27. Participation and empowerment 28. Trust, voluntary organisations and local networks (also know as Social Capital) Socio-economic 29. Economic security 30. Employment 31. Informal activities/economy 32. Partnership and collaboration Socio-environmental 33. Inclusive design 34. Infrastructures 35. Environmental Health 36. Housing (quality and tenure mix) 37. Transport 38. Spatial/environmental inequalities

24. Indicators - criticisms For example: • Difficult to measure indicators • Time horizon • Counterfactual – did it make a difference? • Combined effects of lots of indicators Σ>parts • Context is important - different cultural interpretations of social and different contexts • But it is easy to criticise and hard to present something better!

25. Conclusions The Social Pillar is the least developed area of impact assessment - newest (<10-20 years) No systematic model - least developed theoretically due to difficulty in comparing quality issues/impacts with other quality issues & with quantifiable issues/impacts; holistic v reductionalist views etc. - scale of community being analysed dramatically changes the possible matrices and impact issues Is sustainability the core or is social an ‘add on’ to environment and economic? The challenge is one of integrating the three pillars.

26. Thank you Employment Research Institute Napier University, Edinburgh Institute website: http://www2.napier.ac.uk/depts/eri/home.htm

27. Governance(public participation, social inclusion, and public attitudes) Reasons for community participation in SD • democratic right of the public to be involved in the process - essential part of equitable societies • allows communities to voice their needs & desires, throughout the process of policy creation, delivery and ex-post evaluation • policy effectiveness increased if it incorporates ideas, values and preferences of society and communities directly affected

28. Example of 1 issue:- Demography

29. Employment(employment at the local community level) How does the policy: • facilitate creation of jobs or the loss of jobs? • impact a specific class of workers or households? • affect the demand for labour? • impact on the functioning of the labour market? • impact on the type and quality of jobs? • impact on the health, safety and dignity of workers?

30. Community Development(local social benefits derived from community participation in commercial activities and policy) How does the policy: • impact on the level of social capital and activism by non-governmental groups or individuals? • impact on social inclusion, social cohesion, and distribution of equity and benefits within society? • impact on the liveability and sense of community wellbeing?

31. Health and Well-being(1)(physical health and emotional sense of enjoying and achieving in life) How does the policy: • impact on the quality of soil, surface water, and ground water? The quality and sufficiency of drinking water is of special importance. What are the health gains or risks that may occur? • impact on the occupational health risks that may occur with the development?

32. Health and Well-being(2) • impact development or change of land use on recreational uses in the area and the effects on the local community as well as non-local visitation to the area? • impact development on local infrastructure such as hospitals, schools, waste disposal, sanitation, and emergency response capability? Will there be sufficient capacity? • impact equitable distribution of the health risks, disadvantages and benefits from development? What is the desirable distribution of the gains and losses among social groups?

33. Culture and heritage (1)(culture is the total range of activities and ideas of a group of people with shared traditions which are transmitted and reinforced by members of a group) (heritage can be explained as all the things, places and ideas passed on from the past which are of special cultural significance to the life of a community, including both cultural and human-built elements)

34. Culture and heritage (2) Does the policy: • impact on cultural or heritage issues in a community • impact on sites and features • impact on activities, practices, skills and events • impact on meanings, identities, and representations of importance to the community • Impacts on indigenous peoples

35. Developing and measuring SSD • Governance • Employment • Community Development • Health and Well-being • Culture and Heritage

36. Employment Increase Increase in Population Wages Increase Rents Increase Low Income Workers Displaced from Housing Diagram: Causal model of impacts – increased timber harvesting Policy: increase timber harvest

37. Chart Combined Qualitative Assessment and Impact Matrix Analysis Policy/Project Employment/Wages Population Rent Employment increases (large) * Local population employed - 50 jobs *Non-local population employed - 15 jobs (skilled or experienced to manage expansion) Likelihood - 60% All unemployed workers with appropriate skills set are likely to gain full time employment Population increase (large) Likelihood - 50% Rent increase (large) Likelihood - 60% Rent increase (small) Likelihood - 30% Population increase (small) Likelihood - 40% Employment increases (small) * Local population employed - 25 jobs *Non-local population employed - 5 jobs (skilled or experienced to manage expansion) Likelihood - 40% Some unemployed workers with appropriate skills set are likely to gain full time employment Rent stable -no change Likelihood - 10% Population decrease (small) Likelihood - 10% Wages increase (large) *15% average wage increase Likelihood - 50% *Upward wage pressure through out timber sector *Substantial improvement for unemployed as wages are greater than minimum level Wages increase (small) *15% average wage increase Likelihood - 50% *Upward wage pressure through out timber sector *Substantial improvement for unemployed as wages are greater than minimum level

38. Definition of Rural Regions and Typology • Assessing the pertinence of the OECD classification: • Simple, transparent, takes account of internal patterns within regions, widely recognised • But major weaknesses include heterogeneity of NUTS 3 regions, ignores differences in “economic potential” of regions, density thresholds are arbitrary • 3 alternative options (all incorporating a peripherality index) are presented and assessed, two of these give better discrimination between different types of rural region (assessed by anova test) Typology according to labour market performance: • Simple transparent disaggregative approach • Separate demography and economic activity/unemployment typologies • Combined typology – reveals relatively favourable labour market situation in PU regions, SR and PR more mixed: fewer strong performance regions, more moderately performing regions, and roughly the same proportion of weak regions.

39. Bottom-line Objective • Identify the impacts of a potential policy or proposed project To answer the question: What can be done to maximise and distribute the social benefits while mitigating the negative impacts/costs to individuals or groups within society?

40. The sources of unsustainable development are not always the result of greed, ignorance or irrational choices. Rather, they may be the result of unintentional accumulation of rational, well-intended decisions made by people who are operating within societies whose political and economic systems make it difficult to act in ways that are responsible to all those affected in the present and in the future.

41. The Economics Pillar is still developing as the principle of sustainable development is difficult to analyse as it is contrary to certain key assumptions/goals of traditional economics - weak substitutability - discount rates - economic agents - (sustainable) growth as the main objective

42. Impact

43. Overview • Society needs to identify its preferred future and then assess, plan and implement strategies that move it significantly towards this. • It is important that environmental, economic and social sustainability factors are fully incorporated in the choices of direction and in seeking to achieve it.

44. European Union Policy Background • The Lisbon 2000 Strategy (introduces social dimension, esp. related to work) • Gothenburg Strategy 2001 • European Union Sustainable Development Strategy 2006/7 • Social Agenda 2005-2010 • European Employment Strategy (first in 1997) and the Luxembourg Process

45. Council of the EU • Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs (EPSCO) • The Environment Council

46. Sustainability Impact Assessment Tools (SAIT) • Currently in development • SENSOR • EFORWOOD • PLUREL • SEAMLESS