manual for social impact assessment of land-based ... - Forest Trends
manual for social impact assessment of land-based ... - Forest Trends manual for social impact assessment of land-based ... - Forest Trends
T1 Introduction to Toolbox T1.1 Structure of Toolbox This Toolbox comprises Part Two of the Manual for Social Impact Assessment (SIA) of Land-Based Carbon Projects. It is divided into three main areas: SIA frameworks; data collection and analysis methods; and support material including a review and typology of social impacts, and further guidance on how to select appropriate indicators. Areas 1 and 2 of the Toolbox do not aim for a comprehensive presentation of all the possible SIA approaches and methods, but only those regarded as most relevant to the specific objectives of the Manual. Also, it only provides an introduction to the approaches and tools to help a project developer decide which approaches and methods to use. The project developer should then go to the source materials on a specific method since the guidance provided in the Toolbox is insufficient on its own for implementing a given method. Most of the source materials are available on the internet. T1.2 Classification of SIA Approaches and Methods SIA approaches and methods or tools can be conveniently classified according to three main challenges. These are: • WHAT evaluation or impact assessment design approach or framework should be used to assess social change? • WHAT should be measured to show that a positive or negative social change has occurred? • HOW can the indicators of social change be measured cost-effectively? There is a strong relationship between the first two issues – the evaluation design approach in general leads to the identification of what indicators should be measured. The last question is more straightforward and refers to a range of possible data collection methods for measuring indicators, including participatory methods. Based on an earlier analysis of the literature (Richards, 2008) and other reviews (Schreckenberg et al., 2010) we have selected the approaches and methods regarded as most cost-effective, practical and useful (e.g., for showing attribution). Thus, for example, it was decided not to present evaluation design or data analysis frameworks based on the ‘rights-based approach’ or ‘value chain analysis’. It was also felt that the more sophisticated ‘matching methods’ (experimental and quasi-experimental methods) are inappropriate for land-based carbon projects due to the costs and expertise required. This resulted in three main impact assessment frameworks, although it is emphasized that these are not mutually exclusive, and may be complementary: • Causal models or the theory of change approach (Section T2) • Sustainability framework approaches (Section T3) • ‘Matching methods’ (Section T4) Social Impact Assessment of Land-Based Carbon Projects (1.0) – Part II | 1
Sections T5 and T6 present a range of data collection methods, assuming that appropriate indicators have been selected based on the impact assessment framework (again these can be used in combination): • General data collection methods (T5) • Basic Necessities Survey (BNS) (T6.1) • Participatory Impact Assessment (PIA) (T6.2) • Quantitative Participatory Assessment (QPA) (T6.3) • Participatory Economic Valuation (PEV) (T6.4) • The Most Significant Change (MSC) method (T6.5) Section T7 presents some other useful data collection and analysis tools, and which complement the social impact assessment frameworks and data collection methods: • Stakeholder analysis (T7.1) • Problem trees (T7.2) • Scenario analysis (T7.3) T1.3 Presentation of Methods and Examples As far as possible, each approach or method is explained in a systematic way: • Introduction to method • Description of method • Example of method (if available) • Advantages and disadvantages of the method (or family of methods) • Main sources and further guidance Examples, at least in the context of land-based carbon projects, are sparse in view of the limited experience and sources of impact assessment studies of land-based carbon projects; therefore most of the examples are drawn from the biodiversity conservation and sustainable livelihoods literature. Finally, we stress that the guidance presented here is in general only a summary of the more detailed guidance available in the source documents. While these summary descriptions should facilitate a decision by project proponents of what methods to use, users should refer to the source materials before attempting to implement them. They should also invest in some advisory inputs, ideally at the project design stage, to help design the evaluation methodology and think about appropriate tools. Social Impact Assessment of Land-Based Carbon Projects (1.0) – Part II | 2
- Page 1 and 2: MANUAL FOR SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
- Page 3 and 4: Table of Contents T1 Introduction t
- Page 5 and 6: List of Boxes Box T1. General Data
- Page 7 and 8: Forest Trends’ mission is to main
- Page 9: List of Acronyms (Core Guidance and
- Page 13 and 14: Figure T1: The Main Stages and Step
- Page 15 and 16: Figure T2: Example of a Conceptual
- Page 17 and 18: Figure T4: Generic Conceptual Model
- Page 19 and 20: Stages 3-5 of Open Standards The re
- Page 21 and 22: Figure T7: Diagram of the ROtI Anal
- Page 23 and 24: table so they can be read, discusse
- Page 25 and 26: Table T1: Theory of Change for Seyc
- Page 27 and 28: T2.4 Participatory Impact Pathways
- Page 29 and 30: Table T4: The PIPA Outcomes Logic M
- Page 31 and 32: Main Sources and Further Guidance h
- Page 33 and 34: T3 Sustainability Framework Approac
- Page 35 and 36: Figure T12: SAPA Initiative Modifie
- Page 37 and 38: 1. Identify a small group of key in
- Page 39 and 40: Table T6: Example of LOAM Livelihoo
- Page 41 and 42: T4 Matching Methods T4.1 Introducti
- Page 43 and 44: Advantages and Disadvantages of ‘
- Page 45 and 46: Box T1. General Data Collection and
- Page 47 and 48: Box T3. Data Collection Methods Pro
- Page 49 and 50: T6 Specific Data Collection Methods
- Page 51 and 52: Table T8: Example of a Household BN
- Page 53 and 54: The poverty index can range from 0%
- Page 55 and 56: The PIA guide proposes the followin
- Page 57 and 58: day. The ‘before project’ score
- Page 59 and 60: Figure T15: “Before and After”
T1 Introduction to Toolbox<br />
T1.1 Structure <strong>of</strong> Toolbox<br />
This Toolbox comprises Part Two <strong>of</strong> the Manual <strong>for</strong> Social Impact Assessment (SIA) <strong>of</strong> Land-Based<br />
Carbon Projects. It is divided into three main areas: SIA frameworks; data collection and analysis<br />
methods; and support material including a review and typology <strong>of</strong> <strong>social</strong> <strong>impact</strong>s, and further<br />
guidance on how to select appropriate indicators.<br />
Areas 1 and 2 <strong>of</strong> the Toolbox do not aim <strong>for</strong> a comprehensive presentation <strong>of</strong> all the possible SIA<br />
approaches and methods, but only those regarded as most relevant to the specific objectives <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Manual. Also, it only provides an introduction to the approaches and tools to help a project<br />
developer decide which approaches and methods to use. The project developer should then go to<br />
the source materials on a specific method since the guidance provided in the Toolbox is insufficient<br />
on its own <strong>for</strong> implementing a given method. Most <strong>of</strong> the source materials are available on the<br />
internet.<br />
T1.2 Classification <strong>of</strong> SIA Approaches and Methods<br />
SIA approaches and methods or tools can be conveniently classified according to three main<br />
challenges. These are:<br />
• WHAT evaluation or <strong>impact</strong> <strong>assessment</strong> design approach or framework should be used to<br />
assess <strong>social</strong> change?<br />
• WHAT should be measured to show that a positive or negative <strong>social</strong> change has occurred?<br />
• HOW can the indicators <strong>of</strong> <strong>social</strong> change be measured cost-effectively?<br />
There is a strong relationship between the first two issues – the evaluation design approach in<br />
general leads to the identification <strong>of</strong> what indicators should be measured. The last question is more<br />
straight<strong>for</strong>ward and refers to a range <strong>of</strong> possible data collection methods <strong>for</strong> measuring indicators,<br />
including participatory methods.<br />
Based on an earlier analysis <strong>of</strong> the literature (Richards, 2008) and other reviews (Schreckenberg et<br />
al., 2010) we have selected the approaches and methods regarded as most cost-effective, practical<br />
and useful (e.g., <strong>for</strong> showing attribution). Thus, <strong>for</strong> example, it was decided not to present evaluation<br />
design or data analysis frameworks <strong>based</strong> on the ‘rights-<strong>based</strong> approach’ or ‘value chain analysis’. It<br />
was also felt that the more sophisticated ‘matching methods’ (experimental and quasi-experimental<br />
methods) are inappropriate <strong>for</strong> <strong>land</strong>-<strong>based</strong> carbon projects due to the costs and expertise required.<br />
This resulted in three main <strong>impact</strong> <strong>assessment</strong> frameworks, although it is emphasized that these are<br />
not mutually exclusive, and may be complementary:<br />
• Causal models or the theory <strong>of</strong> change approach (Section T2)<br />
• Sustainability framework approaches (Section T3)<br />
• ‘Matching methods’ (Section T4)<br />
Social Impact Assessment <strong>of</strong> Land-Based Carbon Projects (1.0) – Part II | 1
Change language