Impact Assessment in the Context of Major Disasters: opportunities and requirements

1. Impact Assessment in the Context of Major Disasters: opportunities and requirements Nick Taylor Taylor Baines & Associates www.tba.co.nz

2. In This Presentation Consider what IA involves Provide links to sessions in the conference Pose some questions about how IA practice is applicable in post-disaster situations Consider how IA might be adapted to meet the particular needs of post-disaster situations

3. Introduction Lets not assume IA as we practice it is relevant to disaster recovery (since we have limited experience of this application in NZ) So lets consider what IA is, what it involves, how it can apply to natural disasters and what could improve.

4. What is Impact Assessment “Impact assessment, simply defined, is the process of identifying the future consequences of a current or proposed action” (www.iaia.org) “The purpose of impact assessment is to turn insight into foresight”… (Helge Lund, President of Statoil 23 May 2006, IAIA keynote Stavanger, Norway)

5. “Normal” Impact Assessment So, under “normal” circumstances impact assessment is used asa systematic tool to identify, analyze, and evaluate impacts of a proposedproject, plan, strategy or policy change, in order to: improve the initial design and its outcomes gain approvals gain free and informed consent/social licence to proceed/operate frame monitoring/mitigation and adaptive decisions through implementation

7. Unplanned events (disasters) Require: immediate, emergency interventions more considered recovery plans and strategies understanding a myriad of complex, interwoven consequences There is little dispute that IA has the potential to be applied in disaster situations from immediate effects to longer-term impacts and adaptations However, our recent experience in Christchurch suggests that this has not really occurred to any great extent, and certainly not systematically

8. Examples of Potential Applications of IA Process of forced resettlement Business access and recovery Waste management Heritage management Workforce planning Psychological recovery Traffic management …

9. Prediction?

10. “Going Forward” Both ex-ante (predictive) and ex-post (evaluative) modes apply in disasters While the emphasis early on is obviously on “go forward” we need both IA modes The balance of modes will shift over time but both will remain important

11. Temporal Focus IA considers short to longer-term consequences We are interested in direct and indirect consequences – impact chains We recognise cumulative consequences IA helps with a balanced approach to decision making, eg: Balance of CBD vs suburban centres Greenfields residential vs intensification

12. Integration There is a strong basis for promoting integrated IA practice –particularly for sustainability outcomes IA is multi-dimensional and interrelated: social, health, environmental, cultural, economic impacts … Sometimes IA is applied separately and sometimes in an integrated manner Speakers at this conference are talking about integrated tools – eg the “integrated Recovery Planning Guide” and an “Integrated assessment framework” We need to organise for integration to take place – eg it was essential to the Central City Recovery Plan team

13. Conceptual Frameworks IA applications are influenced by a variety of conceptual frameworks, e.g.: social wellbeing framework determinants of health framework benefit-cost concepts in economic assessment sustainable livelihoods framework gender analysis resilience and social capital from community development others ?????? These frameworks are applicable in disaster situations. There is not time to reconceptualise! Some may require modification in order to be useful???

14. Comparison Cases IA is informed by lessons from elsewhere and from the past – comparison case knowledge: is such comparison case information and insight available for similar disasters? How comparable? Noted heavy use of comparison cases and a number of rapid reviews undertaken across impact areas such as population effects, social/psychological effects, waste management, governance, recovery plans … Common cases included Chile, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, Katrina, Napier, bush fires, snows … A long history of disaster research Internet and email greatly facilitated use of comparison cases

15. Process Characteristics IA applications are influenced by certain process characteristics: e.g. initial scoping of issues profiling of the existing situation/baseline conditions and trends permitted baseline of effects monitoring Are these characteristics still appropriate in disaster situations? Do some require modifying?

16. Community Engagement Widely accepted in principal Difficulty shifting from early top down (militaristic) mode to a more participatory mode Is more than good communication Is more than BAU but can build on existing frameworks and relationships, eg: Community boards Residents’ groups Known stakeholders

17. Share an Idea A six week programme of community & stakeholder engagement Two day Community Expo:10,000 people Website Ten public workshops 106,000 ideas Meetings and workshopswith more than 1,000 key stakeholders 48 hour design challenge

18. Formal Consultation Public road show events 10 sites over 3 weeks, 6,000 people through International speaker series Stakeholder presentations and meetings 5000 comments on the draft from just under 3000 individuals and groups Around 450 asked to appear at hearings

19. To Collaborative Approaches Community driven and collaborative approaches are important in turning vision into action Need an open mind Need resources for capacity building Utilise social media Encourage new groups and initiatives (some of which may be quite ephemeral)

20. Key Questions for us here What aspects of IA have worked or are working well? How applicable are our tools and processes - should we modify aspects of IA practice? What can NZAIA / IAIA do to help strengthen IA for sustainable recovery in the future?