• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Building capability

Print (optimised for IE8)

 Leading change – speeding innovation
Sustainability assessment frameworks
Selecting a sustainability assessment framework
Consulting people
Scales and boundaries for sustainability assessments
Meeting the MDGs effectively - adopt a systems view
Engineering capacity building – twin youth with experience
Leading change for sustainable infrastructure planning
Leading change – context and drivers
Community engagement

•  Leading change – speeding innovation

  Card 77
  Topic: Building capability
  

  • How can innovation be promoted and speeded up?

    • Innovation will be required to adapt to life in a world of 9 billion people
      “…we need an ‘industrial revolution’ for sustainability, starting now”
      (Schellnhuber, 2008)
      
      What is innovation?
      “…using new ideas or applying current thinking in fundamentally different ways that result in significant change”
      (IBM, 2006).
      Crucially this may involve transfer of practices from one sector or geography to another.
       
      
      Why do we do it like this?
      Information and capacity restrict our ability to make rational decisions. As a result much practice is governed by routines of well understood processes and knowledge (Nelson and Winter, 1982). At a systems level, structural and social norms can create technology ‘lock-in’. Innovations must break through this to succeed.
      
      The risk and credibility gap - “Can you guarantee it will work?”
      Our sector has responsibilities for public and environmental safety. Failure costs lives and happens in public. Consequently we are (understandably) risk averse.
      How can we innovate faster in this environment?
       
    • The shape of change:
      The path of innovation from niche idea to standard practice can be idealised as an s-curve (Lowcarbonworks, 2009) In order to succeed, innovations must cross a credibility gap before achieving a critical first successful project, a mass of support, and the potential for widespread adoption.
      
      
       
      
      References
      Schellnhuber, J (19/11/2008) Chief Scientific Advisor to Angela Merkl, German Chancellor; quoted in Guardian, Ian McEwan
      IBM Global Business Services (2006) People and Innovation: Getting ideas on the table
      Nelson and Winter (1982)
      
       

  • Collaborate, and experiment to challenge the underlying system

    • Bridging the gap (Ainger, 2010)
      The challenge is to persuade key stakeholders (managers/ regulators/consumers/financers etc) that an innovation could work. To improve the business case of an embryonic idea, consider:
      ■ ‘What if’ desk studies to test implications/outcomes cheaply and quickly
      ■ Small scale pilot projects to gain credibility or discover problems
      ■ Timing; take action on your idea at the right time in the project, economic and political cycles
      
      Institutional space
      In reality, individuals must work with or within corporate and public institutions. To foster innovation, these environments should be geared to provide space, funding and flexibility for their employees. They should reward success but not stigmatise failure.
      
      Leadership (government and private) therefore has a significant role to play in developing innovation and creating planned opportunities for experiment. In less conducive environments, individuals may need a radically different approach.
      
      
      … we must shift our thinking…away from particular technologies toward the complex system of which they are a part. (Lowcarbonworks, 2009)
       
    • Collaborate to redefine the scope of the problem
      The MDGs are targeted at complex problems, spanning many sectors, continents and cultures. They will only be solved through collaboration to share risks and rewards. A transition away from fragmented thinking to a holistic, systems approach is needed.
      
      
      Three levels of change:
      
      1) Niche-innovations: gather credibility through learning, performance improvements and support from powerful groups.
      
      2) Shifting landscape: economic/social/political changes create pressure on the establishment.
      
      3) Change in establishment: provides opportunities for niche-innovations.
      
      (Geels and Schot, 2007)
      
      References
      Lowcarbonworks (2009) Insider Voices: Human dimensions of low carbon technology.
      Ainger, C (2010) Inventing the future- a sustainability strategy for water, AWA Ozwater Conference
      Adapted from Geels and Schot (2007)
       

•  Sustainability assessment frameworks

  Card 30
  Topic: Building capability
  

  • How do we effectively apply sustainability assessment frameworks in infrastructure projects?

    • Key issues
      ■ Many different sustainability assessment frameworks exist
      ■ Such frameworks have been useful in contextualising decision-making but may have drawbacks in practical application
      ■ Infrastructure and development projects are particularly challenging in their diversity and range of priorities
      ■ Before selecting or developing sustainability assessment systems, potential barriers to their effective implementation should be clearly identified
      ■ The ultimate goal should be to support the integration of poverty reduction and sustainability objectives without imposing a cumbersome and redundant system onto a project
       
    • Diagram: These overarching barriers to effective sustainability assessment have been distilled from various sources including Kline (2001), Gibson (2006) and Hacking and Guthrie (2007).
      
      
      
       

  • Create common sustainability vision and language

    • 
       
    • Approaches, Case Studies, Further Reading
      
      Hardi P and Zdan T (1997) Assessing Sustainable Development: Principles in Practice
      
      Gibson, RB (2007) Sustainability assessment: basic components of a practical approach
      
      Hacking T and Guthrie P (2007) A framework for clarifying the meaning of Triple Bottom-Line, Integrated, and Sustainability Assessment
      
      Kline, E (2001) Indicators for Sustainable Development in Urban Areas
      
      CIB & UNEP-IETC (2001) Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction in Developing Countries.
      
      International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) (2004) Project Sustainability Guidelines
      
      ASPIRE (2009) Research and Development Document, Arup / EAP
       

•   Selecting a sustainability assessment framework

  Card 31
  Topic: Building capability
  

  • Which sustainability systems are relevant to infrastructure and development projects?

    • Key issues
      ■ Many different sustainability assessment frameworks exist
      ■ Infrastructure and development projects are particularly challenging in their varying geographical, social and political constraints and diverse incentives amongst stakeholders
      ■ One of the key barriers for the implementation and delivery of sustainable infrastructure projects in the developing country context is the limitation in capacity and effectiveness of institutional structures and processes
      ■ Developing sustainable 'pro-poor' infrastructure in practice requires tools that support the integration of poverty reduction and sustainability objectives throughout the entire infrastructure project life cycle
      ■ Tools must be viable for practical application on infrastructure projects and must link sustainability and poverty criteria in one system that also addresses institutional issues
       
    • There are a number of assessment systems for application in infrastructure and engineering projects which specifically incorporate aspects of sustainability and poverty reduction including:
      
      
      
      
      
       After ASPIRE R&D Document (2009)
      
       

  • Tailor assessment approach for complex projects

    • Sustainability assessment considerations
      
      ■ Established rating and assessment systems work well for design projects with clear scope boundaries, but the scale and complexity of large-scale infrastructure and development projects may sometimes warrant a tailored approach to assessment
      
      ■ While tailored sustainability assessments may be deemed an appropriate response to a specific project context it should always build on, support and link to existing and required forms of economic, social and environmental assessment
      
      ■ The ultimate goal should be to support the integration of poverty reduction and sustainability objectives without imposing a cumbersome and redundant system onto a project
      
      ■ Selected systems should utilise both qualitative and quantitative evidence that effectively capture the views of the end user
       
    • A simple methodology for deciding whether or not established and/or tailored sustainability assessment systems are appropriate, is as follows:
      
      
       

•   Consulting people

  Card 44
  Topic: Building capability
  

  • When should I consult people?

    • Project lifecycle
      Project planners often use lifecycle models to understand the key stages of work. This can provide a useful conceptual framework but where policy is formed on the basis of the selected model, it is important to compare the real and assumed project characteristics.
      
      Consultation
      There is a growing awareness of the need to engage with key stakeholders and an acknowledgement that "inadequate consultation leads to the law of unintended consequences" (Jones and Gammell). However, making this process effective rather than simply paying lip service to the idea requires consideration from the project's outset.
      
      Stakeholders
      Understanding all the key stakeholders is vital for long term success. Have you found the silent majority or vocal minority? What about disadvantaged / marginalised groups?  
    • "..people came and consulted us but nothing has changed". (Tsunami survivor, Sri Lanka 2006)
       
      
      
      Source: Aspire Research and Development, Arup
      
      References
      
      Jones & Gammell, Evaluating public & stakeholder consultation
      
      Aspire Research and Development, Arup

  • Make consultation early, open and real

    • Ownership and context
      Consultation suggests an inherent power imbalance; consider the potential for addressing this. Who is best placed to make the key technical and non-technical decisions? Can the major stakeholders become participants or owners of the project? Consultation should enable the formation of solutions which are relevant to the local context; beware of imposing external solutions.
      Get started early
      Consultation and participation can offer value at all phases of a project but the potential for change is greatest during the initial stages.
      Be open
      If there is little room for change, don't raise unrealistic expectations. Be honest about what is achievable; don't tell people they're being consulted if you don't intend to listen.
      Communicate and evaluate the decision making process. Are the key stakeholders satisfied and have you captured lessons for next time?
      
      References
      Stakeholder Engagement, International Finance Cooperation, Khwaja (2004) Is Increasing Community Participation Always A Good Thing?
    • Case Study: Solar power in Turkmenistan
      
      Migration from Turkmenistan's Kara Kum desert jeopardised the future of the region's remote settlements. Villagers felt that electricity could encourage people to remain in the area but that a more cooperative community with a greater capacity to deliver change was needed.
      
      With assistance from InsightShare, a British NGO, the community identified its own needs and developed a three year programme to address them. They produced a participatory video which was used to raise funds from donors to purchase solar panels. Families paid for their own panels with sheep which were pooled to create a community fund for future projects.
      
      In addition to providing 450 people with electricity, the project demonstrated 'that communities have the power to improve their own situation, eroding mentalities of hopelessness and dependency'.
      
      Source: insightshare.org
       

•   Scales and boundaries for sustainability assessments

  Card 32
  Topic: Building capability
  

  • What are the 'right' scales and boundaries for sustainability assessments?

    • Sustainability assessment scales:
      
      
      
      Assessment to suit different scales:
      
      Developing of the assessment tool: Build flexibility into the tool to address the diversity by allowing limited exclusion of sub-themes from assessments
      Approach: assess the available resources to conduct the assessment at the forefront – select the right boundary, method (target driven or ISA) and stage (continuous assessment throughout project life cycle or a cross sectional assessment).
       
    • 
      
      
      Further references:
      Finland's Ministry of the Environment (2007) Existing Assessment Tools and Indicators: Building up Sustainability Assessment
      Engineers Against Poverty and Arup (2009) ASPIRE user manual and R&D report
      Lee, N University of Manchester Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice in Integrated Assessment
       

  • Consider a range of scales throughout the project lifecycle, and both direct and indirect impacts on the target community

    • Define assessment boundaries:
      ■ The first step of sustainability assessment: understand project scope and objectives, and define the boundary
      ■ The assessment boundary may be different from the project boundary. Infrastructure developments often have broader social, ecological and economic footprints
      ■ The more broadly the assessment boundary is defined, the more likely the analysis will reflect the full impacts and opportunities associated with the project
      ■ However, a broader boundary makes analysis more complicated
      
      
      Case Study: Point Wells in New Zealand is an example of how to define project boundary and select assessment method for project objectives and scale. Impacts of assessment method on design option selection is also presented. Refer to "Sustainability Assessment for a First Time Wastewater Scheme", presentation by Thomas Haarhoff from Harrison Grierson Consultants (2008)
      
      
       
    • Key considerations when defining the assessment boundary are:
      
      Regulatory and institutional context: is the project located in a developed country or a developing country? What regulatory framework is in place? What authorities and agencies are involved?
      
      Geographical coverage: what are the physical boundaries of the project?
      
      Sphere of influence: what is the potential sphere of influence environmentally, socially and economically?
      
      Scale: is the assessment at a project/programme level or is it at settlement, regional or even national level?
      
      Time: does the project comprise of several phases or is it intended to be replicated or scaled up in the future? If so, will the assessment address only the current project phase or both the current and future phases?
      
      Resource: to what extent are the staffing, expertise and financial support and relevant data available to complete the assessment? What are the time constraints to complete the assessment?
      
       

•   Meeting the MDGs effectively - adopt a systems view

  Card 75
  Topic: Building capability
  

  • Why do we need to see the bigger picture?

    • Figure 1: Sustainability – the Triple Bottom Line
      
      
      
      
      
      Figure 2: The trend to emphasise economic development over social and environmental needs.
      
      
       
    • ■ A system is a combination of interacting elements that function together. A system's behaviour is determined by the relationship between its interrelated parts (e.g. an ecosystem or a country/community's environmental/socio-economic state)
      
      ■ Sustainability requires finding the most beneficial balance between economic, environmental and social needs (Fig. 1). But for the past few centuries, the consequences of human activities have often not been viewed at the systems level (Fig. 2)
      
      ■ Each individual MDG is too complex for isolated projects, so programmes of strategic projects are required for each MDG (Fig. 3, on back). However, MDGs cannot be solved in isolation and have complex interrelations. So a systems approach is needed
      
      
      
      An integrated approach to issues relating to the interlinked themes of climate change, sustainable energy, industrial development, poverty alleviation and air pollution was an essential prerequisite to the vision of sustainability. - the UN Commission on Sustainable Development, 15th May 2007

  • Apply a systems approach, placing all projects in their wider context

    • Systems thinking is the process of understanding how things influence one another within a whole. View "problems" as part of an overall system and examine interactions between the elements.
      
      Systems engineering uses various tools and methodologies to better comprehend and manage complexity in systems. Approaching the MDGs requires consideration of very complex systems that are difficult to model but some methods may include:
      ■ System definition - considering several aspects including: Interdependence, Holistic Emergent Properties (not possible to detect by inspection of individual aspects); Goal Seeking through transformation of Inputs into Outputs; effects of Disorder (randomness); methods of Regulation and feedback; Hierarchies of smaller subsystems
      ■ Visualisation tools- e.g. distribution of defined system parameters onto a framework (e.g. STEEP – see example box) and mapping interrelations (www.venturenavigator.co.uk/content/543)
      ■ Analysis tools - e.g. the Soft Systems Methodology: a systemic approach which allows the system's users to gradually develop a more comprehensive understanding of the system, facilitating stakeholders to reach agreements about what changes all parties can live with. Ref: Bob Williams, soft systems methodology, The Kellogg Foundation, December 2005
      
      
      
      Figure 3: Programmes of interrelated projects are required for each MDG. But also consider how these programmes affect other MDGs.
       
    • Example System: Three Gorges Dam, China – the world's largest hydroelectric river dam, a project with very wide-ranging inflences and implications.
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      Further reading: Fenner, RA, Ainger, CA, Cruickshank, HJ, Guthrie, P (2006) Widening horizons for engineers: addressing the complexity of Sustainable Development Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Engineering Sustainability, 159 (ES4) pp 145-154. Jowitt, PW (2004) Sustainability and the formation of the Civil Engineer, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Engineering Sustainability, 157 (ES2) pp79-88
       

•   Engineering capacity building – twin youth with experience

  Card 68
  Topic: Building capability
  

  • How can young engineers be given opportunities to gain meaningful job experience?

    • Expertise takes time and guidance…
      ■ Building basic engineering capacity is achieved by increasing the pool of competent engineers.
      ■ Engineering competence is achieved through education and job experience, with expertise being achieved only after 10 years of concerted effort (Leonard, 2005)
      ■ Quality job experience must be gained by learning 'good practice' from experienced engineers. Therefore, mentoring is a key part of an engineer's development and must be built into any organisational structure that engineers may operate within
      Barriers to gaining experience…
      Young engineers in development situations often:
      ■ Operate without supervision, so taking on responsibility beyond their experience, because of limited resources to attract experienced engineers. This leads to poor decisions and lack of career progression for the young engineer.
      ■ Or, they are unable to gain work and experience, despite an abundance of need, because of a lack of capacity to support young staff. Denying young engineers the opportunity to gain experience means there is no transfer of knowledge to the wider base of engineers, limiting future capacity.
       
    • Example: engineering shortfall in post-apartheid South Africa
      ■ Pre-apartheid local governments in 1989 served 14 million (the privileged population) with 2,500 civil engineers (= 21 Engineers/100,000)
      ■ Post-apartheid local governments in 2000 served 47 million (the total population) with 1300 civil engineers (= 2.8 Engineers/100,000)
      ■ In 2004 an estimated 3500 to 6000 engineers were required (Lawless, 2008)
      ■ The number of engineers in local government is predicted to remain almost the same, with graduates replacing those leaving the industry, emigrating or retiring. So further interventions are required to grow the stock of experienced and effective engineers
      
      
      Further reading:
      www.pd-how2.org/3_3.htm
      
       

  • Place graduates alongside experienced engineers for simultaneous workplace 'doing and learning'

    • Engineering teams need hierarchies that support young engineers but maintain main responsibility with experienced engineers. e.g:
      ■ A senior professional to initiate projects, supervise and coach junior staff according to a structured training programme
      ■ Two graduates to carry out work under supervision
      ■ Two students requiring experiential training who will assist and learn from the graduates and seniors
      
      Retain experienced engineers
      ■ Through payment incentives and recognition of experience: reduce emigration losses, encourage staff to remain until normal retirement date
      ■ Bring retired engineers back to coach graduates through mentoring programmes and in-house 'learner-ships'
      
      Encourage young engineers
      ■ Link industry with research to provide practical learning and real-life problem solving (see example)
      ■ Develop volunteering systems to build experience:
      ■ Brainstorming, technical support, proposal writing
      ■ Offering stipends to organisations employing graduate technical staff and sponsorships for technicians to continue studying
      ■ Professional accreditation should be encouraged through training schemes, designation of supervisors and payment incentives for becoming chartered or incorporated
       
    • Example: industry/university partnership-Korea
      Pohang Iron and Steel Company (POSCO) founded South Korea's Pohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH) in 1986 to improve the in-country research capabilities needed, to diversify the business ahead of an anticipated future decline in Korean steel-making. POSCO's research facilities serve as a joint arm of the university and the company. POSTECH is now recognised for its leadership in South Korea's educational reform.
      
      Example: Volunteering – "Future Relief Workers"
      The Future Relief Workers Scheme is run as a partnership between the UK charities Registered Engineers for Disaster Relief (RedR) and Engineers Without Borders-UK (EWB-UK), to provide placements for young engineers looking to take their first steps into overseas development and relief, placing young engineers on development projects overseas in countries such as Nepal and Laos.
      
      Further reading:
      - Lawless, A (2008) Numbers & Needs in Local Government: Civil Engineering – the critical profession for service delivery, South African Institute of Civil Engineering
      - D Leonard and W Swap (2005) Deep smarts, Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, Boston, Mass
       

•   Leading change for sustainable infrastructure planning

  Card 70
  Topic: Building capability
  

  • How can I lead for change?

    • "Do not believe that committed individuals, acting together, cannot change the world; indeed, it is the only thing which ever has." Margaret Mead
      
      No matter what your position, everyone has the power to change. Every change starts with someone's decision to do something differently, i.e. an individual action.
      
      ■ Individuals can change their own mindset and become empowered
      ■ Empowered individuals can change companies', organisations' and institutions' mindsets
      ■ Changed companies, organisations and institutions can change the industrial sector, political and economic mindsets
      Ainger, Bath MSc 2001
      
      The key is to identify what you want to change, when is the best time to change and how to make change happen. You also need to understand what is in your personal power to change and what are the opportunities for change.
       
    • Consider your zones of influence – how far can you spread your message?
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      Early in the project lifecycle and at the start of each stage are the best times to instigate change. They are good opportunities to influence team members, partners, clients and project outcomes.
      
      For change to happen, you will need to challenge business as usual. Everyone can initiate and drive change, no matter what your position may be.
       

  • For best results, tailor your approach to suit your audience and your opportunity

    • Some things to consider when attempting to instigate change include:
      
      ■ Do you fully understand the problem? – Why is change necessary?
      ■ What are the barriers to change and how can you overcome them? Are new skills and regulations required?
      ■ How far are you willing to go in order to achieve the change you want to see?
      ■ What is your key message? – You need to make a business case for change
      ■ Do you have sufficient and appropriate examples to support your argument?
      ■ Do you need to research different approaches to change before acting? Investigate what are the best methods of communication
      ■ Who do you need to speak to and who needs to be involved?
      ■ What is important to them and what is your relationship with them? – Tailor your message to suit, choosing the right language for the situation
      ■ How are you going to review progress of the changes you implement?
      
       
    • The key steps you will need to follow to achieve change are outlined below: (See also Kotter's Eight Steps to Change)
      
      ■ Establish your point of view – articulate your different new ideas
      ■ Identify your target audience – and find supporters above, below and at the same level as you
      ■ Identify champions – to help you communicate your ideas
      ■ Communicate your ideas – in the right language
      ■ Achieve some quick wins – create results and stories of success to persuade the majority
      ■ Keep up the pace of change – to make your changes business as usual
      ■ Reflect and review – if this approach isn't working, take steps to improve effectiveness
      
      Further reading:
      Kotter, J (1996) Leading Change Shapiro, A (2003) Creating Contagious Commitment
      Ainger, C (2007) Staff values as enablers for change – 'volunteering' for sustainability; W Pickford Sustainable Development edition of AMED's Journal 'Organisations and People'
      Hamel, G (2000) Waking Up IBM – How a Gang of Unlikely Rebels Transformed Big Blue
       

•   Leading change – context and drivers

  Card 73
  Topic: Building capability
  

  • What are the context and drivers for change?

    • The context for change in infrastructure
      
      The developing world faces many additional challenges for infrastructure development that need change. Specific challenges include:
      
      ■ Infrastructure provision in some countries is not focused where it is most needed (i.e. on poverty alleviation)
      ■ Countries typically do not manage to spend the budget allocated to investment in infrastructure
      ■ A high percentage of infrastructure assets need rehabilitation
      
      At the same time many factors conspire to limit the space for change in design/delivery of infrastructure:
      
      ■ Risk aversion: impacts of failed infrastructure are severe
      ■ Technology 'lock-In' due to structural and social norms
      ■ Infrastructure assets have long lives: slow turnover
      ■ Bias towards unit efficiency at the expense of system effectiveness and resilience
      ■ Short term economic and political cycles
      ■ Mindset and 'compliance culture'
      ■ The time and money required to achieve 'change' in a delivery-focused industry is limited ■ Outdated models of contracting and procurement may inhibit innovation
       
    • Structural inhibitors and capacity
      
      Structural factors inhibiting change within municipalities and engineering/construction supply chains may include:
      
      ■ Within municipalities: a lack of expertise and modern systems, non-optimum use of staff and supply-chain procurement
      ■ Within consultants: a shortage of experienced staff for feasibility, design and site supervision
      ■ Within contractors: a shortage of detailed design and quality control staff
      
      Ways to change – the engineer and the organisation
      
      ■ Practising engineers have opportunities to influence change in projects in terms of design (efficiencies, contributions to sustainable development) and procurement (attaining primary objectives and extending to secondary goals)
      ■ They can also try to affect change in the way their organisations function and the direction they take towards sustainable development
      
      Further reading:
      Foster, V (2008) Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic, Overhauling the Engine of Growth: Infrastructure in Africa, World Bank
      
       

  • Balance individual action and organisational change and utilise tensions between the players

    
    

    
    ‘Tensions’– between activists/NGOs, leading organisations, regulators, and the sector – are needed to ‘pull’ change
    ■ Key to change is understanding the role that you are playing in an organisation, the role that you want to play and the wider context in which your organisation functions
    ■ Change can be affected by both insiders and outsiders, activists and innovators, entrepreneurs and disruptors
    
    Further Reading
    ■ Meyerson, D E (2001) Radical change - the Quiet Way; HBR
    ■ The Social Intrapreneur; A Field Guide for Corporate Changemakers, Sustainability, 2008
    ■ Meyerson et al (1995), Tempered Radicalism and the Politics of Ambivalence and Change. Organization Science, Vol. 6, No 5, Sep.-Oct 1995.
    
     

•  Community engagement

  Card 33
  Topic: Building capability
  

  • How do you get the strategy for a new policy right?

    • Implementing a new policy through an investment in infrastructure is difficult to get right, because the outcomes depend on a complex interaction between technical infrastructure and people's behaviour.
      
      A careful 'test' – a pilot trial, together with proper impact assessment, can provide valuable data for testing and refinement of a new infrastructure strategy, before full scale implementation. Thus the new policy impact risks can be minimised to a controllable level.
      
      1) Why is it difficult to formulate a test for new policy?
      ■ Many inter-dependent variables
      ■ Many environmental factors which are difficult to control
      ■ Not easy to be repeatable
      ■ Difficult to predict human social and economic behaviour
      
      2) What is the purpose of such a test?
      ■ Verifying that what the policy was intended to achieve is what will be delivered by the strategy
      ■ Managing and reducing the risk of getting it wrong, for both the policy maker and general public
       
    • 3) Why not use a Pilot Project and Impact Assessment?
      Impact Assessment is the process of identifying the future consequences of a current or proposed strategy. The "impact" is the difference between what would happen with the strategy and what would happen without it. By combining it with a pilot project, you can assess the real things that happen, not just assumptions from a desk study.
      
      
      
      Example 1: Unsuccessful policy implementation – no testing done
      China's first Land Administration Law was promulgated in 1986. Its implementation in the next 10 years exposed a number of weaknesses that caused serious problems especially the excessive conversion of agricultural land for urban development. Source: Wu, Zhaoji (2001a) (ed.) Public Policy Analysis. China Drama Press
      
      
      
      
      Example 2: Successful policy implementation – testing first, using a pilot trial
      With the early trials on privatisation of municipal services in Shenzhen judged a success, the Ministry of Construction issued new nationwide rules in 2004 formally allowing private investors to operate urban infrastructure. Source: Adapted from "Stinking, Filthy, Rich," Far Eastern Economic Review
       

  • Evaluate a pilot trial using an effective impact assessment framework?

    How do you formulate an effective impact assessment?
    An example of the key elements are given in the table (case studies can be found on the World Bank webpage)
     

    

    
    Reference:
    A User's Guide to Poverty and Social Impact Analysis, 2003
    PSIA case studies
    International Association of Impact Assessment