Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Considering the social and cultural dimensions of development : an analysis of the use of social impact… Pierre-Pierre, Valérie 1999

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1999-0589.pdf [ 7.16MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0088989.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0088989-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0088989-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0088989-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0088989-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0088989-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0088989-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0088989-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0088989.ris

Full Text

CONSIDERING THE SOCIAL AND CULTURAL DIMENSIONS OF DEVELOPMENT: AN ANALYSIS OF THE USE OF SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AT THE CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY by VALERIE PIERRE-PIERRE B.Sc, Universite du Quebec a Montreal, 1997 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE FN PLANNING in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES School of Community and Regional Planning We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1999 © Valerie Pierre-Pierre, 1999 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of / ^ m U M ^ i ^ w l ^ L ,, ^ C^CAfiT The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT CIDA, the leading Canadian agency in the area of international assistance, is responsible for approximately 78% of the country's aid budget. The Agency's mandate to "support sustainable development in developing countries, in order to reduce poverty and contribute to a more secure, equitable, and prosperous world" indicates that the Agency is concerned with social and cultural factors. However, CIDA does not have any specific mechanisms or tools such as SIA to help achieve its social and cultural sustainability goals. The objectives of this thesis were: a) to develop an analytical framework for undertaking and analysing SIA, and b) to compare CIDA's SIA-related strategies, procedures and mechanisms as they stand now to what is stated in the literature, so as to indicate how and when the Agency uses them, and also to assess their quality and effectiveness. The overarching question that constituted the pillar of this thesis was a two-pronged question: Do CIDA's strategies, procedures and mechanisms equal SIA without being SIA? And are those strategies, procedures and mechanisms adequate to cover issues that are normally dealt with through traditional SIA? This question was answered through 1) the application of the analytical framework on two proposals submitted to CIDA, and 2) an analysis of CIDA's SIA-related procedures based on the framework, key informant interviews, and a review of the literature on the Agency's policies, guidelines, and practices. Based on the literature review, the application of the analytical framework, and on the comments of the informants, the need for an SIA-type procedure for assessing social and cultural effects and impacts for CIDA funding is suggested. Such a practice might very well clarify the Agency's requirements in relation to the consideration of social and cultural factors in the development of projects. Also, it is important to stress that the process should not be reduced to a bureaucratic procedure blindly applied. CIDA could go without formulating a distinct protocol for SIA, as it already has several project planning tools and procedures that could lend themselves very well to the purpose of SIA. Indeed, the Agency's results-based management (RBM) framework could be altered so as to make it more holistic in that it would take into consideration both intended and unintended effects and impacts, and would better take into account social and cultural factors. The application of the logical framework analysis (LFA) can also be expanded to achieve similar goals. Further, the Agency could focus on developing a more integrated and comprehensive type of impact assessment that would touch on all the required types of assessments. ii Table of Contents Abstract Acronyms/Abbreviations Table of Contents '. List of Tables List of Figures 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Thesis Purpose 1.2 Impact Assessment 1.3 Social Impact Assessment 1.4 Research Objectives 1.5 Research Questions 1.6 Methodology 1.7 Structure 2. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT: THEORY AND PRACTICE 2.1 Social Impact Assessment 2.1.1 The Birth of Social Impact Assessment 1 2.1.2 SIA Principles 1 2.1.3 The SIA Process 2.1.4 The Equity Issue 2.1.5 The Participation Component in SIA 2.2 SIA in Third World Countries 2.2.1 Potentials of SIA in Third World Countries 2.2.2 Problems with SIA in Third World Countries 2.2.3 The Gender Component of SIA 2.3 What is Being Done in the World? 2.3.1 Techniques and Methods Used 2.3.2 Social Soundness Analysis as Used by the USAID 2.3.3 Social Analysis as Used by the World Bank 2.3.4 The World Bank and USAID Approaches: A Comparison 2.4 Conclusion 3. A N ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR SI A 3.1 Toward an SI A Framework 3.2 SIA Questions 3.3 Social and Cultural Variables 3.4 Assessing Effects 3.5 The Overall SIA Picture 4. SIA AS USED IN THE CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY. 3 8 4.1 CIDA's Development Strategy 38 4.2 Environmental Impact Assessment In CIDA 41 4.3 Social/Cultural Awareness in CIDA 43 4.4 Results-Based Management and the Logical Framework Analysis 44 4.5 CIDA's Bilateral Branch 48 4.5.1 Bilateral Directed Mechanism 48 4.5.2 Bilateral Responsive Mechanism (Unsolicited Proposals) 49 4.5.3 Bilateral Project Appraisal and Approval Process 50 4.6 CIDA's Multilateral Branch 53 4.7 CIDA's Canadian Partnership Branch 53 4.7.1 Industrial Cooperation Program (ICP) 54 4.7.2 Institutional Cooperation Division (ICD) 55 4.7.3 Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) Division 55 4.8 CIDA and SIA 56 5. CASE STUDIES 58 5.1 Selection of Case Studies 58 5.2 Second Subic Bay Freeport Project, Philippines 58 5.2.1 Project Description 58 5.2.2 Analysis 59 5.2.3 Final Comments 63 5.3 Programme Andin de Developpement Cooperatif 63 5.3.1 Project Description 64 5.3.2 Analysis 65 5.3.3 PADECO... What Could Have Been Done through SIA 65 5.3.4 Final Comments 68 6. CONCLUSIONS 70 6.1 CIDA and SIA 70 6.2 Implications 72 6.2.1 Implications of Study Results (for CIDA) 72 6.2.2 Other Implications 74 6.3 Final Comments 75 7. BIBLIOGRAPHY 76 8. APPENDIX I 81 9. APPENDIX II 111 iv List of Tables Table 2.1: Basic Principles of SIA = 11 Table 2.2: Variables and Factors of Sociocultural Feasibility 21 Table 2.3: Variables and Factors Related to Spread Effect 22 Table 2.4: Sociocultural and Demographic Characteristics of the Target Population 23 Table 3.1: Useful Questions to Ask in an SIA 28 Table 3.2: Checklist of Social and Cultural Variables for SIA 31 Table 3.3: Detailed Effects/Impact Table 35 Table 4.1: CEAA Procedural Regulations for Projects outside Canada — Guiding Principles... 42 Table 4.2: Logical Framework Analysis (LFA) 46 Table 5.1: Proposed Mitigation Measures 62 List of Figures Figure 2.1: The SIA Process 14 Figure 3.1: SIA Concept 26 v. A C R O N Y M S / A B B R E V I A T I O N S CEAA Canadian Environmental Assessment Act CEARC Canadian Environmental Assessment Research Council CIDA Canadian International Development Agency C/RPF Country /Regional Programming Framework DAC Development Assistance Committee EIA Environmental Impact Assessment IAIA International Association for Impact Assessment ICD Institutional Cooperation Division ICP Industrial Cooperation Program LFA Logical Framework Analysis NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (US) NGO Non-Governmental Organisation ODA Official Development Assistance OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development PADECO Projet andin de developpement cooperatif RBM Results-Based Management SIA Social Impact Assessment SOCODEVI Societe de cooperation et de developpement international SSA Social Soundness Analysis USAID US Agency for International Development 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 THESIS PURPOSE Since the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, sustainability has become one of the top local, regional, national and even global priorities in development. Indeed it is now a necessity to plan not only for the welfare of present generations, but for that of future generations as well: what we do today should not compromise the way our children and their children will live. Sustainability is a concept that includes, but is not and must not be limited to the bio-physical environment. It encompasses other dimensions such as politics, economics, as well as the social and cultural environment. Although sustainability should be seen as the aggregation of all these areas of concern, the focus of this thesis which is on social impact assessment (SIA) calls for a closer examination of social and cultural sustainability. Social and cultural sustainability have to do with avoiding socially or culturally destructive development initiatives, protecting the vulnerable, respecting social diversity, ensuring all stakeholders' fullest participation in decision-making, and building up, rather than destroying, social capital (World Bank, 1997: http://www-esd.worldbank.org/envmat/vol2f96/ sustain.htm). These principles can, in many ways, be translated to a general willingness to attain increased social and cultural accountability and responsibility, which are some of the driving forces behind SIA. There have been studies and publications on SIA in the international development context, but unfortunately, not nearly as many as those that have been done on SIA and EIA in industrialised countries. For this reason, this thesis attempts to take a closer look at the use of SIA in the context of international development assistance, and more specifically at the policies, processes and mechanisms the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) uses. Thus, the general purpose of this study is to gain a better understanding of the application and use of SIA at CIDA. It is worth noting that the Agency has a history of social development policy, which fits perfectly with the focus of this thesis. However, before going into the details of the research and methodology, it would be useful to do a brief background overview of both impact assessment and SIA. 1.2 IMPACT ASSESSMENT With the growing importance of sustainability, it comes as no surprise that governments' attention has been and is being oriented more and more toward applying impact assessment to 1 policies, development initiatives, and to other kinds of interventions that concern public constituencies. Impact assessments attempt to predict the general consequences of potential policies, programs, projects or events with the help of the targeted people. It has become very clear that events, as well as development-related policies, programs and projects' must be carefully thought through to ensure that they cause little (if any) harm to the people and the environment. Indeed, impact assessment is deemed necessary to "[mjinimize problems, maximize benefits and, increasingly, to involve the public and win their support..." (Barrow, 1997: 1). It is about taking care of the environment (in the broadest sense of the term) and of the people who live within it, and it is also about working with the people instead of solely for them. There are different types of impact assessment (technical, social, environmental, economic, institutional, etc.); however, problems pertaining to their application and recognition often arise. One explanation for this is that several types of impact assessment rely on qualitative data and research methods, which are often deemed unacceptable, unreliable and/or inappropriate by people from the 'scientific, quantitative realm'. Another reason is that some people feel impact assessment is a waste of resources, and a way to ensure that assessors are employed, while others feel that it is a political tool to help parties lobby for their own interests. A lack of understanding on the part of policy makers, administrators and the public (Stevenson, 1997: 15) is yet another factor some use to rationalise the failure of impact assessment to reach its full potential. Nonetheless, impact assessments should be regarded as means to an end: means to achieve development that is environmentally, economically, culturally, and socially sustainable. In terms of problems pertaining to the overall field of impact assessment, it appears that certain types of impact assessment are emphasised to the detriment of others. For example, environmental impact assessments (EIA) are usually conducted to conform to existing legislation, while social impact assessments (SIA) are less popular because there is often no explicit regulatory framework that makes these processes mandatory. Also in the past, planners and decision-makers were predominantly relying on cost-benefit analysis to identify the net economic benefits of development initiatives, as they were mostly concerned with technical feasibility, political acceptability, and most importantly economic profitability. Although many still use the cost-benefit approach, it is important to stress the fact that it does not lend itself well to integrating elements that are not quantifiable (not everything can be translated into nickels and dimes). Then again, it seems that EIA is now dominating the impact assessment 'scene', especially with environmental sustainability being at the forefront of the sustainable development priority of the decade, and also because "[sjince the 1960s, there has been a shift toward more environmentally and socially appropriate development..." (Barrow, 1997: 1). Generally, there are two types of impact assessments: 1) forecasting or ex ante assessment, and 2) 'backcasting' or ex post assessment. The main purpose of the former is to look into the future and see how decisions made now will affect the future (the people, the environment, the economy, etc.). The latter looks at present-day effects and impacts2, and analyses them in terms of what happened in the past. It may also look at an event and determine the consequences of past actions. Both types of impact assessment are ideally systematic, focused, interdisciplinary, 1 Impact assessments are more often than not conducted for projects (Barrow, 1997: 69). 2 For some, the difference between effects and impacts lies in the fact that the former are more short-term, while the latter are longer-term. Additionally, effects refer to project- or study-specific goals, while impacts have to do more with influence on other variables. Nonetheless, for practical reasons, the term 'effects' will be used to refer to both in the remainder of the thesis. 2 comprehensive, and generally iterative (Barrow, 1997: 4). Both processes are expressly focused on effects, on what has occurred or is likely to occur following an event or the implementation of a policy, program or project. The interdisciplinary component refers to the need to pool the knowledge and technical know-how of experts from different fields and backgrounds. For example, a certain type of impact assessment may call for ecologists, biologists, sociologists, and geologists to work together. Comprehensiveness has to do with the level, range, and type of effects covered. Finally, the iterative aspect refers to the need to constantly revisit and refine the analyses based on new information and findings (Krawetz, 1991: 5). Ideally, the different types of impact assessment should be conducted simultaneously and there must be both co-ordination and communication between those who are responsible for the studies/assessments and those who are responsible for the project (Krawetz, 1991: 2). Different types of impact assessment are complementary, as events and development initiatives incur a broad array of effects, which cannot all be identified through only EIA or SIA. Also, for best results some authorities recommend that these impact assessments be undertaken as early as possible in the planning stages of development initiatives, before any major decisions are made. Ex ante impact assessment comes across in the literature as being the more desirable of the two methods, as it serves to mould and perfect development initiatives to make sure that they have positive effects, and little or no adverse ones. One cannot ignore, however, the fact that ex post impact assessments have their merits: they serve to document the effects of past policies, programs, projects or events after they have occurred. Ultimately, both the ex post and the ex ante assessments are complementary, as the former has the potential of facilitating the latter through the provision of information on past events. 1.3 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT In one of her books, Caroline Moser (1987) refers to a Salvadorian sanitation project that illustrates the value of SIA quite well. For this project, male engineers designed the facilities; and women boycotted them because there was a gap at the bottom of the door that exposed their feet and offended their notions of privacy (Moser, 1987: 18-19). The intent here is not to highlight the gender issues raised by this scenario, but rather to discuss the difference the undertaking of an SIA would have made. An' SIA would have made the engineers aware of the women's (and everybody else's) preferences, traditions, and cultural values and norms, which could have been taken into consideration from the start, and integrated in the planning/design process. An SIA would have benefited all parties by making the project more acceptable to all, including the women of the local community. SIA is about forecasting the effects of events, policies, programs and projects on people's physical and psychological health, well-being and welfare, traditions, lifestyles, institutions and interpersonal relationships (Ingersoll, 1990: 9). It touches on "...all social and cultural consequences to human populations of any public or private actions that alter the ways in which people live, work, play, relate to one another, organise to meet their needs, and generally cope as members of society" (Burdge & Vanclay, 1995: 32). 3 The ... field of SIA grew out of a need to apply the knowledge of sociology and other social sciences in an attempt to predict the social effects of environmental alterations by development projects that were subject to NEPA 3 legislation in the USA and the Canadian Environmental Assessment and Review Process (EARP)4 passed in 1973. (Burdge & Vanclay, 1995: 34) SIA, whether on its own or as an integral part of environmental impact assessment (EIA), is gradually gaining wider recognition in the Western world, as it has been recognised that social and cultural considerations must be included alongside economic criteria in the evaluation and decision process (Vanclay & Burdge, 1995: 36). Although SIA is getting more recognition by planners, advisors, decision-makers and social scientists in developed countries, it has yet to gain as much acceptance in the developing world. One of the reasons for that is that ... social and environmental mandates frequently conflict with financial limitations, technical and timeline concerns, and administrative regulations governing the disbursement of funds. This conflict creates pressures on advisors, planners, and decision-makers — the "architects" of projects — to circumvent the delays and costs of social and environmental evaluations of projects" (Rakowski, 1995:527) Nonetheless, SIA has much potential for adding value to development assistance in Third World countries. Indeed, SIA can benefit both the proponent and the affected populations in that it (SIA) will lead to higher project success rates for the former, and to the understanding of project-induced change(s) (Burdge, 1990: 124) as well as empowerment and capacity-building for the latter. There are growing disparities between the developing and the developed worlds. While developed countries benefit from technological and scientific advancements as well as higher-quality tertiary education, many developing countries lack these assets. The developing world is plagued with extreme poverty, high infant mortality rates, famine, pollution, disease, a lack of potable water and of sanitation, poor administration and management, etc. In this context, developed countries, through development assistance agencies, have devised mechanisms and policies to help the governments of developing countries achieve their goals of a better quality of life for all. It is important to note that donor countries' strategies have changed, or rather evolved over the past decades. In the 1960s, there was a strong belief that economic growth was the key to development. It was felt that the social conditions of the poorer members of society would be improved through the 'trickle-down' of the wealth generated by economic growth for the richer members of society (Van Rooy, 1995: 3). Overall this approach has had very little success, and has given way to a new approach where donor countries focused their interventions directly on the poor. The 1980s were a reaction to the excessive lending that took place in the 1970s. Donor countries concentrated on economic management (particularly structural adjustment and political reform) for developing countries (Van Rooy, 1995: 4). 3 The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) 4 As of January 1995, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) has replaced the EARP. 4 Today, donor countries are concerned with sustainability (economic, social, environmental, cultural, political) as well as with improving the quality of life of the poor. In this era of sustainable development, "...impact assessment [has] become locked into the formal procedural requirements of aid givers and aid receivers, ... with its own distinctive rituals and expertise" (Jiggins, 1995: 47). The Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) published a development assistance manual, DAC Principles for Effective Aid (1992), which outlines the 'dos' agencies should follow to implement effective aid, and this book has a few sections devoted to project appraisal, which can be considered indicative of the importance given to project assessment. In this manual, it is clearly stated that "[t]he purpose of appraisal is to enable decision-makers to make rational project choices and to contribute to good project design" (OECD, 1992: 36). International development assistance agencies often conduct or recommend the undertaking of impact and risk assessments to ensure that the interventions they initiate and/or support have as few adverse effects as possible. However, to date, "[tjhere is still no commonly accepted protocol among development practitioners defining 'impact', no common methodology for measuring whatever it is, and unending dispute over how to interpret whatever results from an impact assessment exercise" (Jiggins, 1995: 47). It has been recognised that as outside influences aiding development, international agencies need to carefully consider the application of SIA (and of other types of impact assessment), as the interventions they conceive and those they support affect not only the natural environment, but also the social and cultural aspects of the residents of that environment. "Development impact assessment is used, and is useful, both for addressing generic questions in development and for comparative questions..." (Jiggins, 1995). Consequently these studies should be applied as they offer many benefits for the agencies and the countries (both government and citizens) that host these projects. As for the disadvantages and barriers, they could be eliminated, lessened and/or mitigated through policy, new or adjusted techniques, programs (e.g. training programs), etc. 1.4 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES The following are the objectives of this thesis. • To develop an analytical framework for the undertaking and analysis of SIAs that can be applied to a few CIDA project proposals. • To compare CIDA's SIA-related strategies, procedures and mechanisms as they stand now to what is stated in the literature, so as to indicate how CIDA uses SIA or SIA elements, how it integrates them in its procedures, and also to assess their quality. 1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS Pablo Gutman (1997) conducted a study to evaluate the performance of EIA in assessing the environmental concerns of urban projects in developing countries. To do so, Gutman looked at the EIA studies for a total of thirteen World Bank projects in three regions of the world (Asia, Africa, and Latin America and the Caribbean). Due to the nature of this thesis, in addition to time and resource constraints, not nearly as many projects will be analysed. Also, considering 5 that the focus of this thesis is on CIDA and its SIA procedures, it is probably not advisable to extrapolate findings to the broader international development agency context. Consequently, the overarching research question, which constitutes the pillar of this thesis, is as follows: Do CIDA's strategies, procedures and mechanisms equal SIA without being SIA as defined in the literature? Are those strategies, procedures and mechanisms adequate to cover issues that are normally dealt with through SIA? In addition, the following smaller key questions indicate what this thesis touches on to answer the primary research question noted above. 1. Why does CIDA not use a specific protocol for SIA in project appraisal and approval? How do they conduct SIA when they initiate and/or fund projects? 2. In the case where an independent organisation, an NGO or a foreign government initiates a development intervention, are they responsible for conducting the SIA and other impact assessments? If so, then how does CIDA make sure that social impacts (and other impact assessments) are properly assessed? 3. What criteria, methods and processes does CIDA use to undertake and verify SIA? This thesis looks into the reliability and quality of CIDA's protocols in relation to SIA. It touches on the procedural aspects of the tool: Are the right variables taken into account? Are the right questions asked? Further, it touches on how and when CIDA makes use of SIA: Is it used after policy, program or project design, or before? Does CIDA evaluate and monitor the intended initiatives through an 'SIA-coloured lens'? Also, in the case where CIDA supports initiatives designed by other actors or agencies, does it require SIA studies? All these questions are meant to lead to a better understanding of the inner workings of CIDA in relation to the use of SIA. 1.6 M E T H O D O L O G Y The methodology used in this thesis was essentially qualitative and consisted of two major elements: a) The formulation of a framework for analysing and undertaking SIA, which was based on a comprehensive literature review, and b) An analysis of CIDA's SIA-related procedures based on the framework, key informant interviews, and the existing literature on CIDA's policies and practices. The literature review touched on the basics of the theory and practice of SIA (history, processes, definitions, etc.) in both developed and developing contexts. It also served as the basis for the elaboration of the analytical framework for SIA. The analytical framework itself is made of five components: 1) an explanation of the frame of mind the assessor must be in, 2) a checklist of questions that should be asked or thought of, 3) a checklist of potential variables to choose from 6 based on the characteristics of the case under study, 4) detailed information on effects, and 5) a brief overview of the SIA process. The examination of CIDA's mandate and general guidelines, policies, statements, and strategies pertaining to the social and cultural aspects of poverty reduction served to set the context within which CIDA functions. This examination included reviewing the project approval and appraisal mechanisms of three of CIDA's branches (Bilateral, Multilateral, and Partnership), and the much-talked about results-based management (RBM). It also relied on a series of formal and informal interviews with key informants who were knowledgeable about CIDA. Although the response rate was rather low5, a total of nine interviews were recorded. Two informal interviews were conducted through telephone (Vi) and e-mail (1 V2) communications between the author and CIDA staff members. In these communications, questions used to help shape the thesis were asked and answered. As for the more formal interviews, they consisted of interviews conducted in person (1), by telephone (1) and by e-mail (5). Informants answered a series of open-ended questions (see Appendix I for question samples). It is important to mention that not all interviewees were asked the same questions, as the selection of questions depended on the informants' areas of specialisation and knowledge. In both cases, the means of communication used allowed for more flexibility and convenience for the respondents. All interviews and relevant communications that took place can be found in Appendix I; however, due to confidentiality agreements, informants are not referred to by name. Instead, they are referred to as numbered informants (e.g., Informant 1, Informant 2, etc.), and are only described in terms of their functions or position within the Agency. Lastly, two CIDA-funded projects were examined using the framework for SIA as an analytical tool. Ultimately, the case studies made it possible to show the value of the Agency's project proposal requirements pertaining to SIA. Additionally, this exercise also served to demonstrate the value of such a framework. The first project consisted of a World Bank project the Agency supported through its Multilateral Branch, and the second was a project funded through the Bilateral Branch. These analyses led to a discussion on the implications for SIA practice(s) within CIDA. 1.7 STRUCTURE This thesis is composed of six sections: 1) introduction, 2) literature review, 3) the SIA analytical framework, 4) the CIDA case study, 5) the application of the analytical framework for SIA, and 6) the conclusion. Chapter 1, the introduction, sets the context of the thesis. It includes a broad coverage of the subject matter (impact assessment and SIA), the problem statement, the research methodology, the implications of the thesis for the planning field, and the structure of the thesis. Chapter 2, the literature review, provides an understanding of the field of SIA as well as of the different processes and procedures that are linked to it, by reviewing the theory and practice of the field in both the developed and developing contexts. This section also provides the basis for the SIA analytical framework in Chapter 3. Chapter 3 consists of the framework, the purpose of which is to facilitate the analysis and undertaking of SIA. 5 Out of about twenty-five persons contacted, only nine answered. This is due to the fact that CIDA staff members are very busy with workshops, training sessions and travels abroad. 7 Chapter 4 is the CIDA case study. In this section, the Agency's overall programming strategy, the appraisal procedures of its three development branches (Multilateral, Bilateral and Partnership), as well as its approach to results-based management are analysed. The results of the interviews are woven throughout this section. Chapter 5 consists of the application of the framework on two CIDA-supported projects, for the purpose of determining the value of the Agency's SIA-related requirements and of the framework itself. Finally, Chapter 6 consists of a recapitulation of the findings that came out of the analyses conducted throughout the thesis, and of a discussion on the implications for SIA practices within CIDA. 8 2. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT: T H E O R Y A N D P R A C T I C E ... the most successful projects tend to be those that are sensitive to social and ecological issues and involve the participation of beneficiaries (Rakowski, 1995: 525) 2.1 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT The effects being assessed in SIA are potential and actual (what has happened and what is likely to happen), positive and negative, and are essentially, of four types: 1) direct; 2) indirect; 3) cumulative; and 4) residual. The direct effects, are the immediate results of a policy, program, project or event, as tested against the goals or objectives of the intervention. Indirect effects are not immediate and happen over time, stemming from the policy, program or project implemented, as well as from some unanticipated factors. "Indirect impacts are those caused by the direct impacts; they often occur later than the direct impact, or farther away" (Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment, 1995: 30). Cumulative effects are the sum of several effects, over time that result in synergetic consequences (Gutman, 1997: 380). They are the "...combined effects of project-related impacts" (Canter & Clark, 1997: 324); the "...impacts that result from the incremental impacts of an action added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of which agency or person undertakes them" (Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment, 1995: 30). As for residual effects, they are the remaining effects after the implementation of mitigation measures to alleviate and/or eliminate adverse impacts (Krawetz, 1991: 5). A reading program for children with learning disabilities could be an example to illustrate most of these effects. For starters, a direct effect of this program could be that the children would learn the alphabet, to recognise letters and sounds, to read small words, and to read books. A potential indirect effect could be that the targeted children would gain self-confidence, which would result in improved overall academic performance in the long run (impact). A cumulative impact could be that this program could lead to these children going to college and university and to having successful careers6. 6 If learning disabilities are not identified and dealt with, the children may grow up to dislike schooling and to not pursue their education, which could lead to missed life opportunities. 9 A study of the effects of a program to employ rural women in the service sector could serve to give an example of a residual effect. Even though work hours may be lowered (mitigation measure) to allow for more flexibility, the women would still be away from their dwellings and would not spend as much time caring for the household and tending to their traditional daily chores and occupations. 2.1.1 The Birth of Social Impact Assessment The field of SIA came out of a need to incorporate social factors in the EIA process in order to aid in the prediction of the social implications and effects of environmental changes brought on by development projects (Burdge & Vanclay, 1995: 34). It became formalised with the enactment of the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (Burdge & Vanclay, 1995: 25), which is seen as a cornerstone in the history of both environmental and social impact assessment. To respond to increasing environmental concerns, the NEPA stated that environmental impact assessments (EIA) were required of "all federal agencies ... to consider environmental impacts of their decisions" (Ortolano & Shepherd, 1995: 5). The term 'effects', which is used synonymously with the term 'impacts' in the legislation, includes consequences on ecological, aesthetic, historic, cultural, social, economic or health structures (40 CFR § 1508.8). However, it is clearly stated in the legislation that "...economic or social effects are not intended by themselves to require the preparation of an environmental impact assessment" (40 CFR § 1508.14). In a narrow sense, this means that without an EIA there is no SIA. Because of this, there are some people who believe that an SIA should only touch on social and cultural effects that are directly linked to the environmental change that follows from the implementation of a policy, program, project or event (Informant 3). The same can be deduced from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) in which the term "environmental effect" is defined in such a way as to include changes on health and socio-economic conditions, physical and cultural heritage, use of land and resources for traditional purposes by aboriginal groups, and any structure, site or thing of historical, archeological, paleontological or architectural significance. At first glance, one might be tempted to think that there is an adequate SIA component to EIA, but it is important not to be fooled by appearances. These social and cultural enumerations found in the legislation distract attention away from the fact that these effects are dependent on the environmental change. The Alaskan Pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to Valdez and the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline are two of the earliest examples of projects that made use of SIA to show their effects on indigenous peoples. These projects contributed to raise awareness in relation to the social implications of projects, and before too long, SIA became "...a part of project planning and policy evaluation and part of environmental impact assessment (EIA) as a result of the recognition that social considerations must be included alongside and even in lieu of solely economic criteria in the evaluation and decision process" (Vanclay & Burdge, 1995: 36). SIA was also made to be an integral part of EIA as it was recognised that environmental (bio-physical) in addition to economic considerations were not the only factors in need of appraisal when making decisions about policies, programs and projects. However, some consider that the most decisive factor in the elaboration of SIA procedure was that it could help guide government decisions and investments (Ingersoll, 1990a: 5). As mentioned above, the SIA component of the EIA generally refers to social impacts that are directly linked to the environment-affecting intervention; and that "...social and economic issues stemming from a project's environmental impact constitute a gray area, which is often left aside 10 by both project assessment and the EIA teams" (Gutman, 1997: 390-391). It is important to devise a mechanism that would allow for social impacts that are independent from the strictly environmental change to be identified, discussed, emphasised, eliminated and/or mitigated. This could probably be done by refining the. existing legislation to allow for more explicit and comprehensive SIA guidelines, or by allocating a distinct text of law to SIA that would allow for the identification of a broad range of potential social and cultural effects. 2.1.2 SIA Principles The following table summarises the basic principles of SIA as formulated by the Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment. It is the Committee's contention that these principles are key to successful SIA practices. Table 2.1: Basic Principles of SIA Involve the diverse public Identify and involve all potentially affected groups and individuals Analyse effects on equity Clearly identify the beneficiaries and those who will suffer, and emphasise the vulnerability of under-represented groups Focus the assessment Deal with pertinent (and significant) issues and public concerns Identify methods and assumptions and define significance in advance Define how SIA will be conducted, what assumptions will be used and how significance will be determined Provide feedback on social impacts to project planners Identify the problems that could be solved with changes to the proposed actions or alternatives Use SIA practitioners Trained social scientists employing social science methods are likely to provide the best results Establish monitoring and mitigation programs Manage uncertainty by monitoring and mitigating adverse impacts Identify data sources . Use published scientific literature, secondary data, and primary data from the affected area Plan for gaps in data Identify new information needs, and specify how to collect and analyse them Based on Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment, 1995: 35 11 2.1.3 The SIA Process Boothroyd (1978) sees SIA as both predictive and retrospective. On the one hand, it is predictive in the sense that it tries to identify and anticipate the probable social impacts of projects with data collection, research and analyses. On the other hand it is retrospective as it makes use of past comparable cases to determine and understand effects. These two approaches complement each other by offering an overall wide array of methods of assessing of actual and potential effects. In the remainder of this thesis, the focus will be put on predictive SIA, although many of the principles and ideas brought forth may also apply to retrospective SIA. There are generally eight steps or stages in the SIA process: 1) scoping and problem identification, 2) formulation of alternatives, 3) profiling, 4) projection, 5) assessment, 6) evaluation, 7) mitigation, and 8) monitoring (Burdge & Robertson, 1990: 82). According to the literature, impact assessment should ideally be undertaken as early as possible in the planning process, before any definitive decisions are made. Although there are cases where impact assessments have been conducted after crucial decisions were made, or during implementation, experience has shown that early conduct of SIA often yields the best results. Figure 2.1 serves to illustrate the SIA process. Scoping and problem identification. The first step in the SIA process is that of scoping and problem identification, which is where the identification of specific problem(s), stakeholders7 (Burdge & Robertson, 1990: 82), boundaries8, costs, and research methods (Krawetz, 1991: 4) occurs. This is done in order to determine a) what the significant issues to be dealt with are, b) whether or not a full-scale SIA is needed, and c) the research design. In short, it is at this stage that the Terms of Reference for the assessment are drawn up. Formulation of alternatives. This is the step where "a set of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project [policy or program], reflective of the impacted community's concerns and needs is developed" (Burdge & Robertson, 1990: 82). These alternatives include more often than not the status quo, and sometimes, other potential solutions to the problem(s) identified in the preceding step. SIA, and impact assessment as a whole, should "...consider all options, including the option to undertake no development, to make no change" (Barrow, 1997: 6). In practice, however, SIAs - and other types of impact assessment - are often conducted for one project option, as they are undertaken rather late in the planning process, after some decisions have already been made; and in these cases, the impact studies do not necessarily lead to modifying the projects themselves. Although the formulation of alternatives is a step that is often not taken, efforts should be made to at least consider what would happen if there was no project. This would allow determining if the target people would be better- or worse-off with or without the proposed project. The existing trend seems to be toward working with a sole scenario and to occasionally modify and adjust it pending the outcome of the SIA. Obviously, this is a way of reducing investments of time and money to obtain results, which is legitimate but leaves one questioning the worth and acceptability of the results. Nonetheless, it is true that things are often easier said than done, which leads to wonder if this way of doing things can be considered to be a compromise that could be suitable for both theoreticians and practitioners. 7 This includes the potentially impacted public and their concerns. 8 Krawetz uses the term 'boundaries' to refer to notions of time, space, topics and units of analysis. 12 Profiling serves to identify the social impact variables that are relevant to the SIA, to find a way to operationalise (measure) them, and to compile a social profile of the targeted community (Burdge & Robertson, 1990: 82-83). The basic purposes of this step are to a) draw a portrait of the targeted people (baseline), b) determine what information is needed to conduct the SIA9, and c) find ways of measuring these variables, whether it be qualitatively or quantitatively. Projection occurs after the data identified in step 3 has been gathered. It is at this stage that the data compiled are analysed and evaluated, and extrapolations pertaining to the change(s) in the social and cultural environment are made. This step should be replicated for each of the alternatives determined in step 2. This step "...focuses on the kind and quantity of change in profile features that would occur were one or another planning alternatives to be implemented" (Wolf, 1983: 25). Direct, indirect and cumulative effects must be identified, whether they are positive or negative. Impact assessment is not just about identifying adverse effects; it is about identifying all effects. The "two fundamental problems in prediction relate to: a) the way in which the future is perceived in terms of the relationship between a development and its impacts; and b) the difficulties involved in determining the probability of a predicted impact actually occurring, or even more accurately, in determining the probability of an impact occurring to a specific degree" (Boothroyd, 1978: 127). To add to this, social change is very complex, as ".. .people interact and adapt as change occurs" (Barrow, 1997: 248) and also as "there is no point at which social change "stops" (CEARC, 1985: 4). It is also worth mentioning that change does not occur in a vacuum, and is affected and influenced by different external factors, making it all the more difficult to predict. Assessment. The purpose of assessment is to determine the actual effects of the proposed change(s). It is an ".. .attempt to determine what difference the changes really make" (Burdge & Robertson, 1990: 83). "The task for assessment is to compare the potential impacts of the full set of reasonable alternatives under the range of assumptions about future conditions" (Wolf, 1983: 27). This serves to evaluate the likelihood of the effects, as well as to identify significant effects. Evaluation is the stage where "...who benefits, who pays, and how much by whom are assessed" (Burdge & Robertson, 1990: 83). At this point, the problems, concerns and impacted people are re-identified to ensure that oversights as well as new interests and interest groups are integrated into the process (Wolf, 1983: 28). This step is where the tradeoffs are analysed, and a preferred alternative is identified. Mitigation involves the establishment of compensation mechanisms, as well as of different measures and mechanisms to avoid adverse effects and to minimise unavoidable negative effects (Vanclay & Burdge, 1995: 42). Mitigation also involves the identification of residual impacts (whatever effects remain following the implementation of the mitigation measures). Proposed mitigation measures are not necessarily implemented. In some cases, the proponent ignores the proposed mitigation, whereas in other cases, the proponent has no authority to implement them (Ortolano & Shepherd, 1995: 19). It needs to be said, though, that it is possible for jurisdictions to put in place mechanisms to enforce the implementation of mitigation measures that government decision makers call for in the course of approving a project, as it has been done 9 This information would mostly consist of social variables (e.g., population characteristics) that could be indicative of impacts later on in the process. 13 Figure 2.1: The SIA Process Scoping and Problem Identification I Formulation of Alternatives I Profiling I Projection Assessment I Evaluation Mitigation i Monitoring 1 What are the problems? Who are the people impacted? Is a full-fledged SIA necessary? Use information gathered in step 1 What are the possible solutions? Status quo What are the characteristics of the affected population? What information/variables are needed? How to measure these variables? What variables are best to indicate impacts? Based on trends What is likely to happen? What are the likely impacts for each alternative? Identify direct, indirect and cumulative impacts Based on assumptions about the future What is most likely to happen in each alternative? What are the significant impacts? Re-identify concerns and affected people Compare alternatives and their impacts Select the preferred alternative How can the negative impacts be avoided? How to minimise unavoidable negative impacts? What are the residual impacts? What compensation mechanisms are appropriate? Compare actual and predicted impacts Are there any unforeseen impacts? Are the mitigation measures being carried out? Are the recommended changes being carried out? 14 (Ortolano & Shepherd, 1995: 20). However, this brings up issues for SIAs that are not conducted by government officials or agencies. Monitoring serves to measure "...the actual versus the predicted impacts as well as how the community as a whole and the individual residents have adapted to change" (Burdge & Robertson, 1990: 83). This serves to verify that the mitigation measures and proposed changes to the project are being carried out properly, as well as to identify new impacts. For the monitoring, "few investigations are conducted to determine the impacts caused by projects after they are implemented" (Ortolano & Shepherd, 1995: 20). This is due to the need for proponents to minimise their expenditure, and also to the lack of legislative mechanisms to enforce the implementation of this step. Monitoring is an important step as it: 1) "...concerns opportunities to ameliorate adverse impacts and evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation measures" (Ortolano & Shepherd, 1995: 21); and 2) can enhance the forecasting capabilities by verifying the accuracy of predicted impacts in comparison to the actual impacts (Ortolano & Shepherd, 1995: 20). Considering the nature of the SIA process (i.e. retrospective and predictive), it is important for the findings and predictions to be constantly verified, revised, and ameliorated. There is always room for improvement. Monitoring serves to keep track of changes, and verifying the validity of the actual SIA results. This last step contributes to making SIA an iterative process, which learns from its mistakes and continually seeks to be improved. In a nutshell, the monitoring step serves to inform the process through feedback. "A social impact methodology should allow for the time-specific lifespans of various impacts during the four phases of the development process, viz. [visualisation], planning, construction, operation, and termination" (Wildman, 1990: 71). There are generally four agreed upon phases or stages to project development: 1) initial planning and policy development; 2) implementation and construction, 3) operation and maintenance, and 4) decommission/abandonment (Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment, 1995: 18; Burdge, 1987: 144-145; and Burdge & Vanclay, 1995: 40). Then, considering that the "...stage in project development is an important factor in determining impacts, and not all impacts will occur at each stage" (Burdge, 1987: 145), impact assessment should be conducted for every one of the four stages of the development process. 2.1.4 The Equity Issue One of the purposes of SIA is to make sure that the benefits and burdens of events and development initiatives are distributed as evenly as possible among the target population(s). This means that elite groups should not be the only ones to be reached by benefits, and that the disadvantaged should not be the only ones to suffer from adverse effects. At its base, SIA contributes to ensure that interventions do not target only specific groups, such as men, and that they reach women, people from different generations (i.e., children and the elderly), as well as people from various 'minority' and/or 'ethnic' groups. Also, SIA is meant to help ensure that projects, or their benefits and burdens do no discriminate against these particular groups of people. "Women and men have different perspectives, needs, interests, roles and resources - and those differences may also be reinforced by class, race, caste, ethnicity or age" (CIDA, 1999., Policy on Gender Equity: www.adci-cida.gc.ca). Often, women, children and the elderly are affected differently than men, as their needs, interests, and concerns differ. It is also the case for 15 'minority' or 'ethnic' groups because of cultural differences. Ideally, to ensure that the effects on equity issues are considered, these differences should be incorporated into the SIA (and other types of impact assessment) in the form of specific studies and analyses dedicated to these groups. This also requires the integration of a strong participation component in the SIA process. 2.1.5 The Participation Component in SIA ...participatory development encourages taking into account the cultural dimension. In fact, it is difficult to imagine being able to respect the culture, social dynamic, institutions and organizations associated with a society without ensuring that the population, and their elected officials, can take part in the decision-making process concerning proposed development strategies (CIDA, 1998d: 7) Some groups or individuals may perceive proposed change (policy, program or project) as a direct assault on their social values, family honour, and cultural heritage (Rickson, Western & Burdge, 1990: 4). In such a context, the project is more than likely to be a failure, rejected or unsupported by the people. For this reason, and since "...some of the most important aspects of social impacts involve ... the meanings, perceptions, or social significance of these changes" (Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment, 1995: 16), it is important for the affected people, groups or communities to be involved in the assessment process. If the participation component of the process is well (or optimally) utilised, one of the results will be that the impacted community will express its own fears and seek its own solutions to some of the impact issues raised (Wildman, 1990: 77). Some of the other results of maximised individual or community involvement would be: • the reduction of uncertainty ; • the enhancement of the legitimacy of the SIA and the development project; • an increase in the accuracy of the SIA; • the maximisation of the capacity for the SIA to mitigate impacts; • the minimisation of local resistance to projects & reduced disruption; • an increase of project success; • the prevention of major planning disasters and associated costs; and • the possible economy of money in the long run (Burdge & Vanclay, 1995: 33). PI [public involvement] is a vital component of the SIA, which cannot be done without input from the potentially impacted community (Burdge & Robertson, 1990: 88). If people are made an active part of the process, they are likely to end up in a better position to understand the broader implications of the proposed action (Burdge & Robertson, 1990: 83). This will also increase their sense of ownership and of responsibility for the change-inducing project as well as their acceptance of it (especially if their needs are taken into account). After all, "...public participation is identified with proper conduct of democratic government in public decision making activities" (Webler, Kastenholz & Renn, 1995: 444). This means that the people are not kept at bay while decisions are being made, but rather that they are made a part of the process. 16 Participation is one means of moving away from an elitist, technocratic approach to decision-making. There is a wide spectrum of levels of participation, which ranges from tokenism to complete participation. Whether the people are simply to be informed, or are actively participating in every step of the process is the responsibility of the assessors who design the process. The literature on SIA indicates that the higher the level of participation, the higher the chances of project success. Even though total participation might present some problems for assessors, they need to keep in mind the purpose of their work and remember that tradeoffs are necessary. Participation is one of the key elements of SIA as it is "...required in indicating the areas where effects and impact are expected, and what data need to be gathered, as well as the process for data gathering and analysis. Public involvement is also needed in determining what options and alternatives are available for dealing with the problems created by the event [or intervention] being assessed" (UBC Centre for Human Settlements and School of Community and Regional Planning & University of the Philippines School of Urban and Regional Planning, 1996: 5-6). Additionally, participation serves to identify people's perceptions, fears, needs, concerns and interests; it helps assessors move away from purely technical and highly theoretical SIAs. 2.2 SIA IN THIRD W O R L D COUNTRIES SIA is both a planning tool and a learning tool, which is meant to contribute to better decision-making through the acknowledgement of the social effects of projects, programs, policies and events. While impact assessment is well recognised and applied in numerous industrialised countries, its general application in Third World countries remains a topic of debate for numerous reasons. It is true that the developed and developing worlds are two very distinct contexts, but that does not mean that there are no similarities, or that what is done in one context cannot be done in another. The main objective of SIA and of other types of impact assessments does not change whether in the Western context or the Third World arena. The purpose and goals of SIA are the same in both contexts, although the tool/process may have to undergo some adjustments to be properly suited to the Third World milieu. SIAs may be more difficult to conduct in developing countries because of factors such as the lack of data or of trained personnel, or even because of social and cultural barriers, but they are not impossible to carry out. 2.2.1 Potentials of SIA in Third World Countries There are many, potentials to conducting SIA in an international development context, which are quite similar to those attributable to the use of SIA in developed countries. Indeed, in developing countries SIA serves: a) to save money in the long run (Burdge, 1990: 127; b) as a source of information for decision-makers (Rakowski, 1995: 525); c) to encourage planners to place people at the centre of development (Rakowski, 1995: 525); d) to include proposed beneficiaries and affected populations in decision-making (Rakowski, 1995: 525); and e) to help the affected people understand and prepare for project-induced changes (Rakowsi, 1995: 525). 2.2.2 Problems with SIA in Third World Countries SIA also has its disadvantages. First, SIA is time-consuming, as it calls for multiple research methods. Although there are rapid appraisal methods, time constraints can lead to the omission 17 of certain details. Second, SIA calls for highly skilled practitioners (Burdge, 1990: 129), who are not necessarily available on site. Consequently, there are two possibilities: (1) call on outside experts and field workers; or (2) train locals to conduct the necessary on-site work. However, if training is the option chosen, the time needed to conduct the study is increased. Also, both options can be costly for the proponent. Finally, SIA incurs a need for additional money during the planning stage of a project/program/policy (Burdge, 1990: 126-127). Indeed, injections of additional funds are often necessary to conduct these studies. There are also many barriers specific to developing countries that hinder the implementation of SIAs within the Third World context. Poor communications (Burdge, 1990:128-129; Henry, 1990: 99) between the assessors and the assessed can be a problem, whether based on language, cultural or institutional differences. A lack of finance (Henry, 1990: 99; Rickson et al., 1990: 234) for these studies can slow or inhibit the implementation of the assessment, because they require the injection of additional funds (where to find the extra money?). Inadequately trained people (Henry, 1990: 99; Rickson et al , 1990: 234) and poor data (Henry, 1990: 99) are other barriers to SIA. A single person (or even a couple of people) may not be able to conduct an SIA adequately. SIA is a team effort, and it is necessary for the assessors (the specialists, researchers and professionals) to have properly trained assistants to help them administer surveys, analyse data, do translations, and achieve other tasks. Many Third World countries do not have complete data bases due to the lack of funds to do so, and also because their governments often have other more pressing priorities. Another important factor is public participation (Henry, 1990: 99; Rakowski, 1995: 525; Rickson et al., 1990: 235-236). Not all countries utilise this method, and there are different perceptions and ideas about what public participation is and should be and when it should be used. There are also assumptions about how the very poor and uneducated may not be able to participate adequately; as well as power relationships (some heads of power or figures of authority might feel threatened by the participation of the poor masses). The cultural-political nature of the planning process (Rakowski, 1995: 525) may be seen as a barrier to SIA, as political movements and cultural factors influence governments' planning processes. Also, bureaucratic and structural barriers (Rakowski, 1995: 525; Rickson et al., 1990: 236-238) can complicate the implementation of SIAs. Conducting proper SIA requires changes in the bureaucratic process, which is often well established and resistant to change, or influenced by such things as economic goals. Finally, the use of inadequate techniques (Rakowski, 1995: 525) is another obstacle that makes it harder to conduct SIA. The methods used have to be adapted to the context. The tools of "...technical assessment... commonly used in industrialized countries at the project, company, or enterprize level, are not wholly suitable for development impact assessments..." (Jiggins, 1995: 48). 2.2.3 The Gender Component of SIA In some developing countries, social factors such as gender, culture and local knowledge (among others) are somewhat neglected issues in general impact assessment (Jiggins, 1995: 56) in developing countries. Participation could help remedy these deficiencies: by including the women, elders and other members of the targeted community that information pertaining to social factors, culture and local knowledge can be gathered and utilised. Many authors propose that it would be advisable to pay particular attention to the gender component in SIA, which is of great importance especially in developing countries. 18 It is now widely known that women in the Third World have a triple role. Indeed, women in low-income households are involved in both productive (as primary or secondary income-earners) and reproductive work (childbearing and rearing responsibilities), as well as in community management in relation to the provision of items of collective and household consumption (Moser, 1987: 13). Women play important roles in the low-income developing country setting, making it important to include them in the different stages of project planning, including SIA. It is also necessary to include women in SIA because more often than not, projects and other developmental interventions affect them and men differently. In summary, assessors from the Western world or people with Western training are usually called upon to conduct SIAs in developing countries. It is important for these assessors to keep an open mind, and view SIA guidelines as flexible and adaptive. The principles are more often than not the same no matter where the studies take place. It is only a matter of carefully selecting information-gathering techniques to compensate for the lack of resources and overcome other barriers to the process. Assessors should also practice technology and knowledge transfer to allow for capacity-building in these countries. The 'locals' need to be encouraged and helped to acquire the knowledge and know-how to perform such tasks as impact assessments independently of Western impact assessment specialists. This in itself may be a big step toward local employment, empowerment and capacity-building. SIA is not just for the Western world and should be applied more systematically in the developing world (in both contexts actually). The fact that there are both advantages and barriers to conducting SIA in the developing world is not a drawback in itself. SIA is a process that constantly needs to be improved, and that luckily learns from its errors and miscalculations. 2.3 W H A T IS B E I N G D O N E IN THE W O R L D ? The fundamental task of SIA is to anticipate the human implications of proposed projects by identifying: a) the main features of the proposed project; b) the types and numbers of people who would be affected by those main features (i.e. the project population which includes beneficiaries, benefactors and victims); and c) the main effects the project would have on the various segments of the project population (Ingersoll, 1990b: 19). To get a good idea of the possibilities and potential of SIA, it is important to look at what has been and is being done. Past and present experiences could ultimately serve as a good point of reference to build upon. 2.3.1 Techniques and Methods Used At present, there is no cookie-cutter model for SIA. There exist many ways to conduct research where the purpose is to gather information to undertake SIAs. Although there are several methods mentioned in the literature, one should not think that there are no other alternatives or methods available. "The choice of methods must follow from the social issues raised by the project in relation to the project population" (Ingersoll: 1990b: 19). These techniques must be adapted to the context to which they are being applied, and as often as possible, should even be combined. Using more than one information gathering medium should not be seen as waste of time, or as a waste of resources. Using multiple methods can be very useful in that it can help to 19 verify or confirm information gathered with one or another technique (triangulation). Among the various information-gathering techniques are: questionnaire surveys, informant interviews, the Delphi technique, cultural and social mapping, nominal group exercises, advisory groups, community forums and interviews, focus groups, jury panels, ethnographic techniques (participant observations), the use of pre-existing sources of information and historical documents, demographic analysis, rapid rural appraisal (RAP), and retrospective studies (case studies), etc. There are at least two known approaches that may be seen as precursors or elaborations of SIA among development agencies: a) social soundness analysis (SSA) as elaborated by the USAID in the mid-1970s, and b) the World Bank's social analysis (SA). Both these approaches are comprehensive, and although the technique they apply may have evolved, it is useful to consider them in some detail to see their main thrusts. 2.3.2 Social Soundness Analysis as Used by the USAID In 1975, the USAID formulated guidelines for conducting what it refers to as "social soundness analysis" or SSA of potential projects (Morgan, 1985: 23). This analysis appears to be composed of generally three distinct yet related aspects: 1) sociocultural feasibility or compatibility, 2) potential spread effect, and 3) social impact or distribution of benefits and burdens (USAID, http://www.info.usaid.gov/ftp_data/pub/handbooks/200/2026s7.pdf). Sociocultural feasibility consists of finding whether or not the planned initiative is compatible with the sociocultural environment (people's lives). This requires the examination of beliefs, values, social structures and organisation, i.e. knowledge of the existing social landscape (USAID, http://www.info.usaid.gov/ftp_data/pub/handbooks/200/2026s7.pdf). Table 2.2 high-lights the variables the USAID recognises as those that need to be taken into account for this aspect of SSA. 20 Table 2.2: Variables and Factors of Sociocultural Feasibility-Basic Demographic Data • Population density and location • Religious and political orientation • Modes of production and of ownership, Organisational Structure • Power and social relationships Time Allocation • People's allocation of time during different periods of the year Motivation • People's actual (not assumed) motivations • People's goals developmental goals Target Population Minimum Profile • People's characteristics (level of education, resources, skills, attitudes, etc.) • Beneficiaries, victims and benefactors • Combination of the first four factors (basic demographic data, organisational structure, time allocation and motivation) Obstacles • Opposition to initiative (type and people) Communications Strategy • Information to communicate to people • Method of communication Source: Ingersoll, 1990b: 21 and USAID, http://www.info.usaid.gov/ftp_data/pub/handbooks/200/2026s7.pdf Spread effects touch on the likelihood that the impacts of introduced initiatives will be diffused beyond the targeted population (Morgan, 1985: 23). Table 3 lists the factors that are related to this aspect of SSA. 21 Table 2.3: Variables and Factors Related to Spread Effect Patterns of Leadership and of Authority • Identify the leaders in the area where spread is intended • Identify leaders whose support or cooperation is necessary Patterns of Mobility • Area of mobility within which people live, work, trade, etc. (locus and radius) • Seasonal movements Previous Initiatives in the Region • Retrospective case studies (look at past cases) Information Dissemination • Information that has to spread • Specific effects spread (knowledge, technology, plants, animals, etc.) • Length of time needed to attain desired spread effects Source: Ingersoll, 1990b: 21 and USAID, http://www.info.usaid.gov/ftp_data/pub/handbooks/200/2026s7.pdf Social consequences and benefit incidence involve how and which people will be affected. Indeed, this aspect of SSA requires the identification of the people and groups of people who will benefit and who will suffer as well as how these people will be affected from the implementation of the intended initiatives. This implies the identification of a) the different groups, b) who the initiative is intended to help, c) who is likely to be directly affected, and d) who may be indirectly impacted (USAID, http://www.info.usaid.gov/ftp_data/pub/handbooks /200/2026s7.pdf). This step also involves issues of equity, thus needing the following pieces of information: a) the access to resources and opportunities, b) the distribution of employment opportunities, c) the displacement of people, and d) the effect(s) of the initiative on the power positions and participation of groups (Ingersoll, 1990b: 23). 2.3.3 Social Analysis as Used by the World Bank There are overall five main components to the Bank's guidelines for social analysis: 1) the identification of the project population, 2) the characterisation of the social organisation of its productive activities, 3) the assessment of the cultural acceptability of the intervention, 4) the planning of a social strategy to improve that acceptability, and 5) the consideration of any special or vulnerable populations (Ingersoll, 1990b: 23-24). The identification of the project population consists of knowing the people who will be affected by the initiative as benefactors, beneficiaries and/or victims. This involves examining variables such as those listed in Table 2.4. 22 Table 2.4: Sociocultural and Demographic Characteristics of the Target Population Sociocultural Characteristics Demographic Characteristics • Main occupations • Socio-economic status • Ethnic, tribal, regional, religious identities • Urban-rural distribution • Patterns of social mobility • Experience with previous development initiatives • Current reactions to potential initiative outcomes • Size of communities • Estimated number of people by each type of major initiative outcome • Density of people in their settlements • Age distribution • Sex distribution • Population growth trends • Migration trends • Education level Source: Ingersoll, 1990b: 25-26 The study of the social organisation of the population's productive activities is about describing and understanding the population's way of making a living (Ingersoll, 1990b: 27). To do so, it is necessary to look at the local institutions in which the people conduct their activities (households, local or outside employers, associations, etc.), people's access to information about economic opportunities, people's access to credit and household alternatives to the current modes of production and income generation (or livelihood) (Ingersoll, 1990b: 27). This type of information provides a greater understanding of how people live and survive. Furthermore, this is seen as necessary because it touches on aspects of people's lives that may very well be changed or influenced by developmental interventions. The cultural acceptability of the initiative refers to whether or not the intended initiative meets the needs and concerns of the population in terms of its goals and desires. Cultural acceptability entails the understanding of the targeted people's goals and concerns, their understanding of the initiative (and ways to improve that understanding), an evaluation of the behavioural changes that are implied by the project, and in the case of many differences between the development goals and the people's goals, the possibility of reconciliation and tradeoffs (Ingersoll, 1990b: 28). The planning of social strategies has to do with making an initiative more socially acceptable or sound through a) the encouragement of the commitment and active participation of the people, b) the maximisation of the equitable distribution of the initiative's benefits and burdens among the project population, c) the diffusion and durability of initiative benefits, and d) the anticipation of the significant longer term impacts (Ingersoll, 1990b: 28-29). Finally, the consideration of special or vulnerable populations serves to take into consideration minority tribal and ethnic groups who may have different ways of life, interests, traditions, and cultural norms and values than the rest of the people. This last step involves the recognition of these marginal groups, as well as the inclusion of provisions specific to them, and of compensation mechanisms (in case there is any displacement involved (Ingersoll, 1990: 32) or any significant changes to their way of life) in the project design. 23 In sum, the Social Analysis is meant to do the following: • Identify key stakeholders and establish an appropriate framework for their participation in the project selection, design, and implementation. • Ensure that project objectives and incentives for change are acceptable to the range of people intended to benefit and that gender and other social differences are reflected in project design. • Assess the social impact of investment projects and, where adverse impacts are identified, determine how they can be overcome or at least substantially mitigated. • Develop ability at the appropriate level to enable participation, resolve conflict, permit service delivery, and carry out mitigation measures as required. (World Bank. 1996. "Social Assessment: Methods for Social Analysis" in The World Bank Participation Sourcebook, http://www.worldbank.org/html/edi/ sourcebook/sba 108.html) 2.3.4 The World Bank and USAID Approaches: A Comparison The USAID approach focuses on knowing who the target population is, how they are to be affected, and if those effects spread beyond the target population. The World Bank is concerned with knowing the target population and its acceptance (perception) of the development intervention, finding ways of making the intervention more acceptable, and making sure that vulnerable groups are taken into consideration. Clearly the two approaches are very similar in what they hope to achieve and in the type of information they seek. In both the USAID and the World Bank approaches it is quite obvious that the SIA is meant to be undertaken after a particular development option has been selected. It appears that these agencies regard SIA as a mechanism to help in the fine-tuning of their development initiatives. This is not bad in itself, as it ultimately allows for the consideration of social and cultural factors in the make-up of these initiatives. Additionally, this serves to make sure that the interventions are accepted by and are in conformity with the targeted people's concerns and perceptions. Both agencies seem to believe that it is important to know the target population. They believe it is necessary to know who the targeted people are, what their characteristics are, etc. Obviously, to get to know a population, its living habits, beliefs and ways involves participatory methods, which has been depicted in the literature as being a crucial part of SIA. Also, the USAID and the World Bank both look into the people's perceptions of their interventions. To do so, both agencies try to find out about the target populations' motivations, goals and possible opposition to their developmental interventions. There are some differences between the World Bank and the USAID approaches. For instance, USAID tries to see if effects spread beyond the target population (spread effects), whereas the World Bank only concentrates on the target group. Also, the World Bank explicitly states its concern with and awareness of 'vulnerable or special populations', whereas the USAID makes no mention of such groups in its guidelines. Of course, this does not necessarily mean that SIAs conducted by USAID do not take into consideration these groups of people. It is just worth noting that the concern is not explicitly stated. Overall, the World Bank and the USAID SIA guidelines are quite similar; the differences lie mostly in the way ideas were grouped and explained. It is encouraging to see that such reputable and important agencies have developed mechanisms to conduct SIA-type approaches, and have 24 taken into account social and cultural factors in the undertaking of development initiatives. Obviously, these agencies' protocols are not complete if analysed with what the literature advances, but it is surely a step forward. It is also important to keep in mind that these agencies' guidelines are meant to help their staff in the undertaking of SIA. These guidelines are indicative of what should be done at minimum, and could easily be added to by the assessors on a case by case basis. What these agencies have developed can be improved and built on as the years go by, and as their approaches are put into application. Impact assessment is meant to be an iterative process that is constantly being reviewed and improved based on lessons learned from past experiences and on the discovery of new information. These approaches can and will probably be improved on in time. What is worth highlighting here, is that these agencies have taken the first and most important step toward more socially and culturally acceptable and responsible development. 2.4 CONCLUSION SIA is both a planning and a learning tool, as well as a process which allows for better-informed and more solid decisions to be made based on the acquisition of knowledge of the potential effects and impacts of policies, programs, projects, or events on the social and cultural aspects of people's lives. This tool's workings have a much larger scope as they also lead to the identification of different alternatives to the intended change(s) and their social impacts, as well as to the production of mitigation measures to eliminate or alleviate adverse social impacts. As pointed out by some authors, "SIA cannot judge. It can merely report how the different segments of the community are likely to respond to development projects or policies, and advise appropriate mitigation mechanisms" (Burdge & Vanclay, 1995: 51) This chapter covered the origins of SIA, as well as its processes. The purpose was to offer the reader a better understanding of SIA, which unfortunately is still overshadowed by EIA. At the beginning of this chapter was the following quote: "...the most successful projects tend to be those that are sensitive to social and ecological issues and involve the participation of beneficiaries" (Rakowski, 1995: 525). SIA is as important as EIA and needs to be given the importance it deserves or else policies, programs and projects will risk failure. Social impact analysts or assessors ".. .in every country must be public advocates of the need and usefulness of SIA, as well as professional practitioners of the art" (Ingersoll, 1990a: 5). Indeed, "...it is up to analysts [and assessors] conducting SIA to demonstrate convincingly that the condition of the social environment can, does, and should influence project design and implementation, in practical ways which people can appreciate and officials can use" (Ingersoll, 1990a: 5). SIA, in addition to EIA and other types of impact assessments, is necessary for decisions to have good short- and long-term outcomes that ultimately improve the quality of life and meet overall local, regional, national and international sustainability goals. Further, impact assessment must not only be limited to developed countries, but must also be a tool for developing countries as well. "...SIA is both essential and possible in poor countries as well as rich countries (Ingersoll, 1990a: 1). Indeed, this chapter has stated the advantages and disadvantages of conducting SIA in developing countries, and argues that on balance, the tool/process needs to be used more in the future. 25 3. AN ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR SIA As mentioned in the introduction, one of the objectives of this thesis is to design an analytical framework to aid in the undertaking and the evaluation/analysis of SIAs, based on the literature, and on other sources. This framework consists of a brief explanation of basic concepts, as well as of lists (checklists) of variables and questions that should be asked or thought of when undertaking SIA. In formulating a framework, it is important to keep in mind that impact assessment should be flexible and adaptable to the different contexts to which it may be applied. This framework's primary purpose is to provide enough information to give people the opportunity for choice, depending on the specific characteristics of the contexts within which they are working. It is important to stress the fact that there is no cookie-cutter model for SIA or for general impact assessment for that matter. Proof of that can be seen in the varying theories and models that abound in the literature. 3.1 TOWARD AN SIA F R A M E W O R K In the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) of the Mar copper Mine Tailing Spill in the Boac and Makulapnit River Valley, Marinduque Province, Philippines (1996), the assessors responsible for the study clearly stated that "[t]he main conceptual framework used in this study involves a more or less linear relationship of "cause and effect" as well as a correlational nature". This relates to the changes an intervention or event introduces over time. With that in mind, an SIA model, which is inspired from Burdge's SIA model (1987), was elaborated. Figure 3.1: SIA Concept T., To... X T + 1 T + 2 past present event or near future distant future developmental intervention At its base, this model consists of a simplified linear timeline, which serves to illustrate the concept of SIA, and more generally, of impact assessment: the introduction of events and/or of developmental interventions in a specific location leads to changes in the future, which are what impact assessment focuses on. It is necessary to mention that the timeline was purposely extended both before and after To, the present. Consequently, T.i is representative of the past to which the assessor should turn to get as much information as she/he can to familiarise herself/himself with the locality and its people. This referral to the past can also be useful in 26 uncovering past cases that are similar to that which is being worked on. Second, To is indicative of the present; and it is at this time that an assessment of the present situation would be done, still in the spirit of getting to know and understand the area and its people. Third comes the intervention or event represented here by the symbol ' X ' . Last, T+i and T+2 represent the near and distant future, which are points in time that the assessor needs to consider when anticipating the effects of X. It is important to look at both the near and distant future to allow for more comprehensive and sustainable planning that looks ahead, and is geared toward the long-term. According to the literature, it is customary to use five years from the occurrence of an event/intervention as the near future, and ten years or more as distant future, although specific events and interventions may require different time frames. In a mine tailing spill for example, it is known that the process of acidification may occur after five years — effects on health and other factors, therefore require a longer time perspective. Heavy metals and toxic wastes also enter the food chain, requiring for each a more distant time frame (say twenty years or more). 3.2 S I A QUESTIONS SIA is not just about compiling data, it is also about analysing and interpreting it. Indeed, all the data collected serves to answer questions and to anticipate effects. Table 3.1 constitutes an overview of the questions identified in the literature as indicators of what assessors and international development assistance agencies should ask and consider when conducting SIA. This list of questions is illustrative and not an exhaustive list. This enumeration of questions should serve as an indicator of what should be thought of, and may be subject to alterations when necessary. These questions should also apply to all scenarios (alternatives) considered. 27 Table 3.1: Useful Questions to Ask in an SIA Questions What is the project about (purpose)? Who are the stakeholders in this intervention (beneficiaries, victims and/or benefactors)? What are the stakeholders' characteristics (stakeholder profiles)? What are the stakeholders' needs, interests, concerns and perceptions? How can the people's needs, concerns, and interests be included in the intervention design? Are the intervention's objectives and goals consistent with the stakeholders needs, interests and capacities (are they compatible?)? If not, how are they different?10 What are reasonable alternatives to deal with the issues and concerns raised? What are good and appropriate indicators (variables) to identify and measure impacts? What social and cultural factors will affect the ability of the stakeholders to participate or benefit from the intervention? Are the people willing to make a significant contribution to the initiative (whether in the form of investments, responsibilities, or participation)? What level/type of participation is necessary for the success of the intervention? What type of training is needed for the people affected? What is the locality's regulatory framework (limitations or helpful)? What institutional arrangements are necessary? What are the general effects of the intervention (direct, indirect, cumulative)? What will be the effects of the intervention on women? What will be the effects of the intervention on vulnerable groups (ethnic or tribal groups)? Are any impacts likely to have effects outside of the targeted population or area (spread effect)? How can adverse effects be eliminated or mitigated (are they unavoidable)? Are there any compensation mechanisms? What are the residual impacts? What are the obstacles to the implementation and success of the intervention? Is the intervention sustainable? Other(s) This list of questions can also serve to evaluate and analyse SIAs, in that it can help verify if the right questions were asked, if the necessary steps were taken, and if the appropriate information was gathered and analysed. 3.3 SOCIAL AND C U L T U R A L VARIABLES "SIA variables point to measurable change in human populations, communities, and social relationships resulting from a development project or policy change" (Burdge, 1987: 146) When designing a project, policy or program, or when looking at specific events, it is important to be aware of, and to take into consideration the context within which the intended intervention is being introduced or is taking place. According to Cochrane (1979: 44), the collected 1 0 This is in the case where the SIA is not being conducted during the design and planning stages, but rather after. 28 information "...should provide guidance not only on where the projects can be most advantageous and what size those projects should be; it should also provide insight into the number of projects required in particular locations in order to affect a regional or national plan". There have been several inventories or guides outlining the social and cultural variables that should be taken into account when conducting SIA. The overview of both the USAID and World Bank approaches has served to expose some of the issues and variables international development assistance agencies consider. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) also had a set of guidelines for social assessment, and the Agency's outline of a socio-economic profile is available in Appendix II-A. Other data requirements for conducting SIA have been appended to this chapter. There is Burdge's (1987) "List of Twenty-Six" (Appendix II-B), as well as Cochrane's (1979) "National Inventory of Cultural Resources"11 and "Social and Cultural Mapping Information" (Appendices II-C and II-D). There is no one set of variables appropriate for all SIAs. Contexts and problems vary, and for this reason it is important to be capable of adapting the variables and methods used. As mentioned in Chapter 2, it is necessary to identify variables at the profiling stage. These variables have a double purpose. First, these variables serve to identify and define the target population. It is not useful to try to assess the impacts of a policy, program, project or event if the assessor knows nothing about the community she/he is supposed to look at. Second, these variables represent the social and cultural aspects of the targeted community that are likely to be affected by or will undergo change because of the intended policy, program, project or event. Thus, they can be used as indicators of change. Table 3.2 presents a checklist of the social and cultural variables that can be taken into consideration when assessing projects, programs, policies, or events. This list is the result of the compilation and synthesis of the information compiled and mentioned above. It serves as a guide for assessors, informing them on what kind of information they should seek. However, it is important to keep in mind that this is not an exhaustive list, and that it is flexible and adaptive. Indeed, it can and should be (when necessary) added to and adapted to meet the needs and requirements of the situation12. Also, assessors should only choose to look at relevant variables, to keep their assessment as focused as possible. When considering the checklist, it is also a good idea for the data to be disaggregated according to gender, class, ethnicity, or any other distinguishing characteristics. This is important because it serves to identify and eliminate (or at the very least alleviate) social inequities, as well as inequities in impact distribution. Once the social and cultural variables have been identified, it is necessary to select indicators to directly measure impacts. For example, one could keep track of the number of child deaths as an indicator that the overall health of a community's children is improving. In case direct measurements are unavailable, it may be possible to look at proxy measures. For example, one This can easily be translated into cultural and social variables and/or characteristics of a location. Not all initiatives (policies, programs or projects) will call for the same type of information. 29 could choose to keep track of the building materials used on dwellings as an indicator of increased household income. 30 a = S i5 s < C/3 CD > "3 -»-» 3 o c 'o o t / 3 o +-» xn O <D ,B u at H o u es 'I es c o c > c o Q I' S.I cd ICS O | O cd ° CJ ; eS l u 3 a a, cd • — 9 o e$ s-M S3 © ® . . w ^ B £ .a £ £ 3 o c/3 £ o o -*-» 3 O a> -+-< o 0) D. , x W c cd o cd o o o 1) N v5 c IQ B .2 I '•^  cd O _o T 3 I B CO O 60 a. 3 O u 60 l-o cd '5s ID E o o c 1> 3 60 o c _3 cd X> <u T3 C a c o %-t 3 £ 1 L . -t-» CO x <D V) C .2 '-£ cd o 3 w 60 c .2 '-^  3 a, o OH cd t; o E - * -» , • B ,cd cd o cd EI u -t-t cd cd cd 3 cd O ' I cd o 3 <U a, c o cd o 'cd Q o o 1-3 O o 60 C 'Lo 3 O B Ci eS I. B a, O 53 S "O c cd c E t > -a o c o o o O o O on (U NB o 60 % cd CJ T3 C cd B B (3 tw B c V w 1-C. "a> "2 » o <u tu <u 2m B s « S E i5 s GO J -& in > i --*-» u o t/3 O o U c o o o 03 H o i > ca o 00 .SPl c o c o "3 T3 C cS C O C o T3 O 4) O '> 0) o 1^ o o o 4) O o < 00 ca u o on O ft on <U bo ca c o , l u 2 s ° "S ^ on i 1 E/5 O o <u OT) 3 O J3 c T3 o C ca ca <u >, ly, s unit E om c o 00 ca u loc rol ca u Ull en H (U T3 3 3 O "> ca , ^ <D _> ' - ^ O '1 ft ca o 3 T3 O <£ C ca ca J: T3 3 O 3 u< -*-> oo E ca o _E>b| "53 o ft c -4—» o a , i<8 c E > o c o -a ca H oo 6 » -4—» ft C ft ft Si o ca ca ft c ca Q u > E #4» CO o S a u Oh 32 c E a |5 I s < in i-x> » - H S-l > •— 3 3 o -o .2 'o o 00 o o Xi u c o u es H o o n. u o -*•» u es 'I > c o ca o l-g ca -t—» c o '•S -o o o cd > ed TJ C cd C J o \< O \< ca X> o X) cd > cd -o c cd o c o c8 O 3 C*H o XI -S3 'ea > ca T3 c ca ID < >. bD t-l C J c o C J a. o , a es E s es CA w en *> -a -SI « bO E 15 ca es o a -a es _j sn es es H a « a 0 u _ 1 - c •S g S »a r s™ hH en eS E <u E E o > c C J x: _ ~ ^> X o .-3 E c c •2 8. _ o ca 3^ C J O 3 >. ° .ti <D c >-| g E B u S C J Si 5b I _o o C J X o < c o (U o -o l CJ o ca C0 ca 3 I > e a s o u '> a "en C P5 33 3.4 ASSESSING EFFECTS As mentioned in Chapter 2, it is stated in the literature that SIA (and more generally impact assessment) should ideally be conducted at all stages of the development process because different effects are likely to occur during each of these stages. For example, the construction of a power plant may create jobs, but the closure of the plant can result in the loss of jobs, and maybe in the abandonment of the community if the plant is what sustained it. Additionally, it is also said to be necessary to look at both effects (short-term) and impacts (long-term) to allow for their framing in time. It is important to know that an effect will occur, but it is even better to have an idea, even if approximate, of when it will occur. As mentioned in the previous chapter, change is complex and does not stop at a particular moment in time; further; it is also dynamic, as more often than not it evolves and grows, and/or induces other changes. The 'snowball effect' is what best describes the occurrence of change. It is important to go into the details of the identification of effects. For best results, the identification of effects may be decomposed as demonstrated in Table 3.3. Obviously the tables could be reorganised; it would probably be more advantageous for each development stage to have its own distinct table. Table 3.3 is meant to be simply indicative of what can be done in terms of determining impacts. 34 Table 3.3: Detailed Effects/Impact Table Effects/Impacts Level Direct Indirect Cumulative en Individual s '5 Household ii Plan Neighbourhood ii Plan Community Region c Country •8 § a Individual Household .2 o 2 a Neighbourhood 2 3 -C ca Community o " Region U Country Individual *S 8 r- fl Household .2 2 Neighbourhood >- a u •— Community o S Region Country +•* Individual B B .2 2 Household fi E .2 B Neighbourhood 1 •§ E B Community Decoi Aba Region Decoi Aba Country Section 2.1 went into the identification of the different types of effects and impacts that are generally referred to in the literature, i.e., direct, indirect, cumulative and residual. Essentially, the assessment of these effects consists in their prediction, analysis and evaluation. According to most authors, direct, indirect and residual effects are the easiest to identify, as they are often commonsensical, relying on the target population and the assessors. However, cumulative effects are not so easily identified, as they a) usually occur farther in time, and b) are the sum of effects. Consequently, common sense is not enough, although it helps, in the prediction of cumulative effects. A good method to identify cumulative and residual effects would be to refer to past cases that are similar. Looking at the effects of these past cases can serve as an indication of what may happen in another case. Of course, it is probably best to use a combination of methods to increase the accuracy of findings. The levels of effects and impacts that need to be examined depend on the nature of the event, policy, program or project under study. Not all interventions require the examination of effects at all the levels shown in the tables. The smaller and the more focused a project, the smaller the level at which impacts are studied. One example could be a sanitation project managed by a non-governmental organisation (NGO). In this case, the project consists of the construction of 35 ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrines in a small marginal community of less than 250 inhabitants. In such a case, the regional and national levels are not significantly relevant. This is a small project meant to benefit only the people of the community. Consequently, it would be best to look at effects at the individual, household and community levels. The identification of the level of effects to be examined is done at the scoping stage (see section 2.1.3). As stated in the literature, effects are determined based on the relevant variables and information collected through participatory methods. In the case of the sanitation project mentioned above, there are many possible effects. For instance, at the community level, there could be, in the long run, significant improvements in the overall health of the community. At the household level, the income could increase due to the ability of healthier men and women to work more and/or more efficiently. In the Third World, women often play a triple role: that of caregiver and secondary income earner, that of child bearer and that of community manager. In this context, when the women get sick, or when they have to take care of the sick, the time they can allocate to their daily occupations is greatly reduced, and often so is the household income (Pierre-Pierre & Cleveland, 1998: 13). Also, the training and education of the community's people could lead to positive effects/impacts at all three levels: a) healthier living habits, and b) better job opportunities. 3.5 T H E O V E R A L L S I A PICTURE According to the literature, a good SIA should focus on certain topics. In terms of information gathering, it is important for assessors to ask pertinent questions in order to select and gather appropriate (and relevant) data, and make decisions that will help frame the assessment. It is necessary for the assessors to take a look at the targeted locality's institutional and regulatory background in order to see what they can use to the project's advantage, and to identify constraints they have to work with. Again, since women are often affected differently than men, it is crucial to incorporate a strong gender analysis component in the SIA. As mentioned in the previous section, it is important to think about how women specifically will be affected by events or developmental interventions to ensure that they are not adversely affected or that they are equally benefited13. For the same reasons, it is also important to make sure that 'minority' groups are identified and their needs and concerns taken into consideration. 'Minority' or 'ethnic' groups can have overall different ways of life that may revolve around certain traditional norms and values, and it is important for events and developmental interventions to affect them only in such a way that is acceptable to them. Authors constantly stress the fact that participation is crucial for SIA and for other types of impact assessment. The literature also recommends that whenever possible, it is good to identify alternatives to the proposed intervention to give stakeholders a range of scenarios to choose from. The assessors need to determine the effects and impacts of every alternative for the purpose of identifying who will be affected and how. Based on the information gathered, a preferred scenario may be chosen. Once this has been done, the assessors may come up with mitigation measures to eliminate and alleviate adverse effects and impacts, and identify anticipated residual effects and impacts. Finally, the last step consists of making provisions for monitoring to ensure that effects and impacts were accurately predicted, as well as to identify any missed elements, effects and 1 3 This applies to children and the elderly as well. 36 impacts. It is important to reiterate the need for a participatory element to be woven through the entire process because participation is key. The following principles were taken out of the literature, and represent a concise SIA 'to do' checklist. These are the steps assessors and international development assistance agencies may take to ensure that they at least do the minimum required as stated in the literature. 1. Ask relevant questions. 2. Select and gather project-specific variables. 3. Investigate the regulatory background. 4. Undertake gender analysis. 5. Undertake minority or ethnic analysis. 6. Utilise participatory methods. 7. Identify alternatives. 8. Determine effects and impacts. 9. Select a preferred alternative. 10. Elaborate mitigation measures. 11. Identify residual effects and impacts. 12. Make provisions for monitoring. 37 4. SIA AS USED IN THE CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY Established in 1968, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) is Canada's leading international development assistance agency. The Agency is responsible for about 78% of Canada's aid budget (CIDA, 1998b: 6). It supports projects in over one hundred countries by working in partnership with developing country governments, Canadian organisations, institutions and businesses, as well as with NGOs, international organisations and agencies (CIDA, 1998b: .6). 4.1 CIDA ' s DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY A few key elements, which lead to basing this thesis on the use of SIA in CIDA, are the Agency's development goals and mandate. The mandate of CIDA is to "support sustainable development in developing countries, in order to reduce poverty and to contribute to a more secure, equitable and prosperous world" (CIDA, 1998b: 7). The concept of 'sustainability' within the Agency is broad and encompasses five distinct yet complementary components: 1) environmental, 2) economic, 3) social, 4) cultural and 5) political (CIDA, 1992: 5). Put together, these five elements constitute CIDA's sustainable development framework, which is at the base of its development assistance strategy. CIDA defines environmental sustainability as being linked to the management and protection of ecosystems to "... maintain both their economically productive and ... ecological functions, maintaining the diversity of life in both human-managed and natural systems, and protecting the environment from pollution to maintain the quality of land, air and water" (CIDA, 1992: 5). As for, economic sustainability, the Agency sees it as referring to broad-based economic growth and development over the long-term (CIDA: 1997a: 4). Further, for CIDA, social sustainability involves a more equitable distribution of incomes, and the participation of the people in decisions that affect their lives (CIDA: 1992: 5); whereas cultural sustainability implies the sensitivity to cultural factors in addition to the recognition of the values conducive to development (CIDA, 1992: 5). Lastly, the Agency views political sustainability as linked to the assurance of human rights on top of the promotion of democratic development and good governance (CIDA, 1992: 5). At CIDA, it is believed that sustainable development can be attained only through the respect and consideration of these five elements. However, it is necessary to highlight that for the Agency 38 Sustainable development does not define a particular path for development, but focuses on what would enhance the quality of life. It requires the capacity to adapt to constantly changing conditions, as well as the flexibility to work with uncertainty, and with differences in local conditions and in public expectations shaped by culture, values and experience. Above all, it is participatory, ensuring that local communities and individuals have substantive input into designing and implementing development programs and projects. Only when local people have a sense of ownership and personal investment in their own development will they have a stake in ensuring its long-term sustainability (CIDA, 1997a: 3) Additionally, having recognised the link between poverty and environmental problems, CIDA made poverty reduction the central focus of its official development assistance (ODA) cooperation program. Indeed, CIDA policy states that "[wjhile developed countries generally have the means to solve environmental problems, the situation is very different in many developing nations where the immediate priority is often survival, frequently at the expense of the environment" (CIDA, 1997a: 12). One example of this is the cutting of trees in forested areas by the poor in order to get the building materials and fuelwood necessary for their survival. This leads to erosion and, in some cases, to desertification of the land; so alternative building materials and fuel energy sources are needed for the poor. It is for reasons such as this that CIDA has settled on reaching its goals of sustainability for developing countries through poverty reduction and by targeting the poorest people. Further, to meet its goal of achieving sustainable development in developing countries through poverty reduction, CIDA focuses on six priority areas: 1) basic human needs, 2) women in development, 3) infrastructure services, 4) human rights, democracy and good governance, 5) private sector development and 6) the environment (CIDA, 1998b: 7). Each of these priorities corresponds to a policy, strategy or a set of guidelines, the purpose of which is to help in the implementation of the Agency's mandate. Based on the assumption that "...every human being is entitled to decent living conditions..." (CIDA, 1997c: 4), the Agency elaborated a policy on basic human needs, CIDA's Policy on Meeting Basic Human Needs (1997). This policy statement identifies seven key areas of intervention: 1) primary health care, 2) family planning and reproductive health, 3) basic education, 4) food and nutrition, 5) water and sanitation, 6) shelter, and 7) humanitarian assistance14 (CIDA, 1997c: 14). CIDA has committed to direct 25% of its ODA to meeting basic human needs (CIDA, 1998b: 7). The purpose of CIDA's policy on women in development is to "...support the full participation of women as equal partners in the sustainable development of their societies" (CIDA, 1998b: 7). The Agency found this important as, in the developing world: a) Most women's work remains unpaid, unrecognised and underevalued; b) Nearly 600 million women in developing countries are illiterate, which is about twice as much as illiterate men; c) Maternal mortality is at 384 per 100 000 live births (this is 12 times higher than in OECD countries); and 1 4 Humanitarian assistance consists of the provision of basic human needs in times of emergency. 39 d) Women produce more than 60% of all food in sub-Saharan Africa but they do not have equal access to credit, land, education, seeds and fertiliser (CIDA, 1997a: 10). The Agency has just come out with its new policy on gender equality, CIDA's Policy on Gender Equality (1999), the goal of which is to "...support the achievement of equality between women and men to ensure sustainable development" (CIDA 1999a: ii). Further, in this policy, it is clearly stated that gender equality must be considered as an integral part of all CIDA policies, programs and projects (CIDA, 1999a: ii). "Access to basic infrastructure services ... is one of the essential criteria for determining well-being" (CIDA, 1997a: 10). Often, the poor do not have access to potable water and sanitation, which makes for poor living conditions, high mortality rates, and overall poor health. CIDA has noted that "Over 1.2 billion people continue to lack access to safe water, about 2.5 billion lack adequate sanitation facilities, and 2 billion people are not served by electric power" (CIDA, 1997a: 11). Helping these people to get these basic services is helping them live longer healthier lives. CIDA's policy on human rights, democratisation and good governance aims to "...strengthen democratic institutions, the role and capacity of civil society in developing countries, the competence of the public sector, the capacity of organizations that protect human rights, and the will of leaders to respect rights, rule democratically and govern effectively" (CIDA, 1997a: 11). This priority is about giving the people a voice, and also about making sure that the political atmosphere/environment is conducive to listening and to letting these voices be heard. The private sector development priority involves the promotion of sustained economic growth through the support of private sector development (Government of Canada, 1995: 42). It encourages the private sector in both developed and developing countries to invest in poor communities, and expects governments to provide the conditions that would ultimately allow the private sector to contribute to development. Finally, CIDA's environment priority is based on the will to help developing countries protect their environment and to contribute to addressing global and regional environmental issues (Government of Canada, 1995: 42). The Agency has policies, statements and reports15 to contribute in this area, in addition to its environmental impact assessment protocol and its commitment to meet the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) requirements. The interviews done for this thesis revealed that the policies, mandate and priorities adopted by CIDA serve as the main considerations in SIA. Informant 1, for example, mentioned that the Agency's programming framework is shaped and structured by a number of policy statements and papers that touch on sustainable development, poverty reduction, basic human needs, women in development and gender equity, infrastructure services, human rights, good governance and democratisation, private sector development, and environmental sustainability. Al l this is what CIDA does and focuses on in its work in and with developing countries. This statement is corroborated by Informant 3 who said that the Agency will only initiate and support projects that 15 CIDA's Policy for Environmental Sustainability (1992), Our Commitment to Sustainable Development: The Strategy of the Canadian International Development Agency (1997). 40 provide for the three big cross-cutting themes (gender, the environment and sustainability16), and that officially try to meet as many of the development priorities as possible. From CIDA's mandate, and from its general strategy, it is obvious that the Agency is concerned about people's welfare. According to Informant 8, everything the Agency does has an impact on people's lives, and the Agency's ODA priorities all point to that. Indeed, the development priorities all point to ensuring the well-being of the people both physically and psychologically. This, in addition to the Agency's definition of sustainability and of sustainable development which points to the necessity for the use of participatory methods, is a clear indication that social and cultural factors are somehow included in the Agency's practices; although there are questions pertaining to how exactly the Agency does so. When CIDA launches or funds a new project or program, it is necessary for the Agency to "...understand and plan for a whole range of possible effects that touch every facet of life: economic, political, social, cultural and environmental" (CIDA, 1996b: 3). Nonetheless, whether or not CIDA has a distinct protocol for SIA to include these factors in its practices is the main concern of this chapter. Still, considering that "[pjroject assessment will be applied by the multilateral, bilateral and partnership branches" (CIDA, 1996a: 11), the procedures of all three branches will be looked into. 4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN C I D A In the late 1980s, CIDA elaborated policies, which were meant to help the Agency deal with its growing concern for the environment in developing countries. These policies can be translated into the following requirements: a) EIA for all CIDA-funded and initiated projects, b) more emphasis on projects that enhance the environment, and 3) greater efforts in institution-building, data gathering and public awareness (CIDA, 1987: 3). These policies in addition to the Agency's growing environmental awareness eventually led to the policies and strategies on the environment and sustainable development that the Agency uses today. Good development requires a basic knowledge of the possible impacts of policies, programs and/or projects on the environment. In recent years, national and international development agencies have recognized the need to incorporate environmental safeguards into individual projects, and the methods of doing so have been incorporated considerably" (CIDA, 1987: 13). Today, the Agency uses EIA — which is amply documented within the Agency — to support its goals of environmental sustainability, which is required by law. As stated by Informant 1, "...it is important to remember that the environmental analysis is a mandatory requirement of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and is therefore required by legislation". The CEAA not only sets requirements for projects done in Canada; it also sets guiding principles for projects conducted outside of the country. Table 4.1 summarises the CEAA's Projects Outside of Canada Environmental Assessment Regulations, which apply to all of the Agency's branches. 1 6 In the broadest sense of the term. 41 Table 4.1: CEAA Procedural Regulations for Projects outside Canada — Guiding Principles 1. Projects outside Canada, financially supported by the Government of Canada, will be subject to the directives of the CEAA. 2. Environmental assessment will be undertaken as early as possible in the decision-making process. 3. Responsible authorities will be given the flexibility they need to assess projects in foreign jurisdictions and in varying circumstances. 4. Assessments outside Canada will be conducted with respect for foreign agreements and arrangements that Canada is party to. 5. Canada may be able to rely on the environmental procedures of foreign states and international or multilateral institutions — when they meet the basic goals and objectives of the CEAA. 6. Canada will encourage other countries to develop, improve and implement their domestic capacity for environmental assessment. 7. Procedures for public participation outside Canada will be modified to respect foreign sovereignty and local conditions. 8. Records of environmental assessments for CIDA-supported projects in countries outside of Canada will be made. Source: CIDA. 1996. Environmental Assessment at the Canadian International Development Agency It is known that "...environmental damage of any magnitude is usually accompanied by undesirable economic and social consequences" (Pallen, 1996: 3). Clearly the legislation provides for some social and cultural effects. However, as mentioned in Chapter 2, the social consequences Pallen refers to are only those stemming from the change(s) to or the exploitation of the bio-physical environment, which means that many other social and cultural effects are neglected or not captured by the EIA legislation as it stands today. It is for this reason that informants have proposed a protocol for SIA that is distinct from the CEAA be adopted by CIDA. Informant 3, for example, stated that the SIA component of EIA is insufficient. Informant 5 mentioned that the SIA component of EIA should be allowed to use its own framework, instead of being subjected to economic paradigms. The CEAA should be revisited so as to allow for a) more precise and comprehensive SIA requirements, and b) to allow for the undertaking of SIA separately from EIA, because as it stands now, the SIA component of EIA is nowhere near being acceptable and comprehensive enough. 42 4.3 S O C I A L / C U L T U R A L AWARENESS IN C I D A From CIDA's policy statements, it can be deduced that within the Agency, there is an awareness of social and cultural factors that is linked to the Agency's focus on people, its general programming strategy, as well as to its ideas revolving around sustainability and sustainable development and the need for participation. In the Handbook for Social/Gender Analysis (1989) — which was put together by the Coady International Institute for the purpose of training CIDA staff on issues related to gender — it is said that "...CIDA increasingly supports a concept of development which is people centered, and which attempts to address the needs, limitations, and interests of the poorest peoples in the Third World". Further, the Institute added that "[t]his strategy requires that CIDA staff have the relevant knowledge, attitudes, and skills to implement such policies through the aid process and particularly through the project cycle operations" (Coady International Institute, 1989: 1). Although Informant 7 clearly stated that the manual "...was lacking in several ways", it is still useful in that it puts forth principles and ideas that are conducive to the consideration of social and cultural factors in the Agency's practices. As highlighted by Informant 1, the Government of Canada statement Canada in the World (1995: 45-46), describes basic principles for effective programming: a) responding to developing country needs and emphasising local participation; b) knowledge of the context to design projects and programs; c) promoting self-sustaining activities; d) co-ordination with others; and e) drawing on Canadian capacity. Informant 1 further explained that these principles were updated in CIDA's Our Commitment to Sustainable Development as follows: a) acquiring and using local knowledge, b) applying participatory approaches, c) applying iterative approaches, d) enhancing capacity development, e) promoting program and policy coherence, f) promoting donor co-ordination, and g) demonstrating results. It is obvious that the Agency is concerned with social and cultural factors. Several of these principles are applicable to and are key parts of SIA. CIDA has supported a series of initiatives in order to maintain an approach to development which respects the socio-cultural contexts in which it intervenes. These initiatives aim to encourage participation by civil society, to promote social dimensions of development, to emphasize the importance of local cultures, and to bring awareness to its personnel of issues related to cultural dimensions of development projects (CIDA, 1998d: iv) It is interesting to note that in spite of the clear and explicit commitments to social development, CIDA, at present, does not have a distinct and specific protocol for SIA. "Canada is committed to an international process of community empowerment, whereby traditional human values are recognized as central to the decision-making process in the developing world" (CIDA, 1996a: 7). However, while CIDA does not have a distinct and specific protocol for SIA, it utilises other procedures and bases itself on principles that have many overlaps with traditional SIA. elements. Examples of this are the advocacy of the use of participation and of participatory methods, the interest in the social and cultural dimensions of development, the recognition of the importance of local cultures and knowledge, etc. Informant 2 mentioned CIDA's policies covering all six of its program priorities, Canada's foreign policy statement, strategies on cross-cutting issues'such as gender and the environment, as well as a variety of operational policies and guidelines 43 governing criteria and anticipated results as tools the Agency uses to assess social impacts. Informant 5 identified the Agency's policies on basic human needs, women in development and gender equality, and poverty reduction, as well as the Sustainable Development strategy, Basic Human Needs: A Participatory Approach for Strategic Planning, and the Gender Assessment Handbook as tools for assessing social impacts. Also, Informant 8 stated that the closest tools to SIA are the Agency's gender analysis and the country/regional programming framework17 (C/RPF). 4.4 RESULTS-BASED MANAGEMENT AND T H E LOGICAL FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS Since CIDA does not have a specific SIA protocol, in what ways does the Agency ensure that the social effects of its programs and projects are properly assessed? A number of Agency informants indicated that this is done through the use of two approaches — results-based management (RBM) and logical framework analysis (LFA). RBM and LFA are linked to SIA as they provide the project's purpose, goal, objective, and inputs, which are very useful to social assessors in their work. Additionally, the LFA is deemed to be useful in outlining strategies for tackling issues (Coady International Institute, 1989: 63-65), including, but not limited to social issues. In the words of Informant 1, RBM is very important within CIDA, because it requires the Agency to be "...clear about objectives, realistic about expectations, methodical in the review of performance and flexible in making required changes". Informant 1 further stated that RBM is "...a philosophy and an approach to planning and implementation of projects". Results-based management is integral to the Agency's management philosophy and practice. CIDA will systematically focus on results to ensure that it employs management practices which optimize value for money and the prudent use of its human and financial resources. CIDA will report on its results in order to inform Parliament and Canadians of its development achievements (CIDA, Results-Based Management in CIDA-A Policy Statement, http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca) Results-based management (RBM) is: • The realistic definition of expected results, based on appropriate analyses; • The clear identification of program beneficiaries and the design of programs to meet their needs; • The monitoring of the progress towards results and resources consumed, with the use of appropriate indicators; • The identification and management of risks, while bearing in mind expected results and the necessary resources; • The increase of knowledge by learning lessons and integrating them into decisions; and • The report on results achieved and the resources involved (CIDA, Results-Based Management in CIDA - A Policy Statement, http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca). RBM can be condensed into the following five distinct components: a) stakeholder participation, b) defining expected results, c) identifying assumptions and risks, d) selecting performance 1 7 The C/RPF identifies the Agency's development strategies and objectives for specific countries and regions. 44 indicators, and e) collecting performance information and performance reporting (CIDA, 1999b: 4), which are elements that are pertinent to SIA. Informant 8 stated that RBM requires that the beneficiaries and people who will be affected should be identified, although there is no requirement to explicitly elaborate on the way in which these people will be affected. As for the LFA, it is a tool that complements RBM by reflecting its logic or rationale (CIDA, 1997d: 1). Table 4.2 illustrates what the LFA is; including what it should contain. According to the literature, the LFA matrix enables communication among stakeholders, as well as makes for better and more efficient project approval, monitoring and evaluation. In a nutshell, this matrix identifies a) the goal and purpose of the project, b) the inputs and outputs, d) the anticipated results, e) the indicators that will serve to prove that the anticipated changes have occurred, and f) the risks that can potentially inhibit the success of the project. Additionally, it is necessary to add that the LFA has been altered to provide means of verifying results as well. 45 Table 4.2: Logical Framework Analysis (LFA) Narrative Summary Expected Results Performance Measurements Assumptions/Risk Indicators Project Goal or Program Objective The program objective from the C/RPF which the project is intended to make a contribution to Impact A long-term developmental result at the societal level that is the logical consequence of achieving a specified combination of outcomes Performance indicators that will provide evidence that the project has made a contribution to the achievement of the stated developmental impact Assumptions are the necessary conditions that must exist for the cause-effect relationships between outcomes and impact to behave as expected Risk indicators will measure the status of the assumptions identified above Project purpose The project objective which addresses the priority development needs of the identified beneficiaries and is achievable within the scope of project activities Outcomes Medium-term development results benefiting an identified target . population that are achievable within the timeframe of the project and are the logical consequence of achieving a specified combination of outputs Performance indicators that will provide evidence that the project has made a contribution to the achievement of the stated developmental outcomes Assumptions are the necessary conditions that must exist for the cause-effect relationships between outputs and outcomes to behave as expected Risk indicators will measure the status of the assumptions identified above Resources (inputs) Listing by categories of resources (inputs and/or activities) required to achieve the project purpose, planned budget for each type of resource and total project budget Outputs Short-term developmental results produced by or for the benefit of the project delivery partners that are the immediate consequence of project activities and inputs Performance indicators that will provide evidence that the project has made a contribution to the achievement of the stated developmental outputs Assumptions are the necessary conditions that must exist for the cause-effect relationships between inputs and outputs to behave as expected Risk indicators will measure the status of the assumptions identified above Source: CIDA, A Guide to CIDA's Bilateral Responsive Mechanism (Unsolicited Proposals), http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca The LFA requires the anticipation of the short-, medium- and long-term consequences of projects, as well as the consideration of performance measures and means of verification to demonstrate whether or not a project has achieved its goal(s), purpose(s) and projected results. It also calls for the identification of the risks that potentially threaten the successful implementation of projects. Informant 8 referred to LFA as a means to articulate chains of causal relationships 46 resulting from the implementation of projects. Informant 8 further went on to say that LFA can be seen as a form of SIA, but that it is much more than that and touches on political, economic, etc. effects as well. Although the LFA has the potential of touching on a broad array of project outputs, outcomes and impacts (e.g., social, cultural, economic, environmental, etc.), it is not clear what level of detail is required or even encouraged when one uses it. Should project outputs, outcomes and impacts be identified in terms of their incidence at the individual, household, neighbourhood, community, regional, or national level? Should they be identified broadly without going into specifics? Unfortunately, this information is not provided in the guidelines for the LFA. However, the impression, based on the content of the guidelines The Logical Framework: Making it Results-Oriented (1997), is that project outputs, outcomes and impacts should be identified as is appropriate or called for according to the nature and characteristics of projects. There are similarities and differences among RBM, the LFA and SIA. First, all three call for participation or involvement; this is important especially for the design, planning and implementation of projects, as well as for the identification of likely results. In the case of SIA, it is clear that it is necessary for the targeted communities to be involved as they can provide valuable information pertaining to their lifestyles, beliefs, perceptions, needs and concerns. In the case of RBM, there is also a need for stakeholder participation for the contents of the LFA to be agreed upon. In both cases, participation may lead to a greater sense of ownership and of commitment toward the intended project in the targeted groups, which can only help in achieving project success. Second, the definition of expected results is common to both SIA and RBM. As mentioned in the previous chapters, the purpose of SIA is to anticipate the social effects of policies, programs, project or events in order to enhance positive effects and eliminate, or alleviate adverse ones. RBM involves the anticipation of results in the spirit of helping the design of a program or project. Indeed, with RBM one starts by asking the following fundamental questions: Why should this program/project be done? What results are wanted or hoped for? Who are the beneficiaries of these results? How are these results going to be attained? (CIDA, 1999b: 9). However, there seems to be a difference between the SIA and the RBM anticipated results as the former seeks not only positive results, but also negative ones, and the latter seems to be solely interested in positive results. This is corroborated by Informant 8 who stated that RBM and the LFA do not explicitly ask for the inclusion of negative results, and instead focus on the positive. Further, RBM, through the LFA, does not seek to enhance, mitigate or eliminate any of the project effects, as does SIA. It is also necessary to make the distinction between results that are wanted or hoped for, which is what RBM and the LFA call for, and effects that will occur as a consequence of the implementation of a project, which is what SIA does. SIA appears to include a broader range of effects, encompassing even effects that are not planned for, whereas RBM calls for the identification of the results the project is meant to achieve. Third, according to the literature both SIA and the LFA are iterative: they both require modifications as changes occur and new sets of information arise throughout the duration of the project. Informant 3 stated that the LFA should be a "living document". And fourth, both call for the integration of provisions for monitoring: the LFA requires that means of verification be determined to verify the achievement of planned results as well as the project efficiency, while in 47 SIA monitoring serves to validate and verify the accuracy of the analyses and to pinpoint oversights. It is clear from the foregoing that the LFA is not a substitute for SIA or any other type of impact assessment. In fact, the LFA is more of a tool that helps synthesise, visualise and communicate the expected outcomes of projects. However, while they are not interchangeable, the LFA and SIA are complementary. As mentioned above, the LFA provides information pertaining to the project purpose, objective and goal. Using this information, the social assessors could more easily conduct their assessments and identify social impacts that could be entered in the LFA as expected or anticipated results. However, it does not seem likely that the results shown in the LFA would be reflective of the range of effects listed in SIA. Instead, the LFA seems to emphasise the desirable and positive potential effects identified in the assessments. According to Informant 3, though, the LFA should capture both positive and negative effects to make sure that they are dealt with in the stages of planning that follow the elaboration of the LFA. A key activity in this thesis was an assessment of how SIA-type activities were conducted in different branches of CIDA. These branches were the Bilateral, Multilateral and Partnership units. 4.5 CIDA's BILATERAL BRANCH CIDA's Bilateral Branch is comprised of four geographic programs: 1) Americas, 2) Africa and the Middle East, 3) Asia, and 4) Central and Eastern Europe. The geographic programs within this branch consist of country-to-country programs that enable the Government of Canada to initiate and carry out development cooperation objectives through direct relationships and the collaboration of eligible recipient countries. Projects supported through the geographic programs reflect both the needs of developing countries and Canada's ability to meet those needs (CIDA, http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca). 4.5.1 Bilateral Directed Mechanism The Bilateral Directed Mechanism is a system under which the CIDA bilateral staff direct all initial phases of the project, and the project implementation is contracted to Canadian executing agencies. All in all, it is a competition open to both the for-profit (private) sector and the not-for-profit sector to obtain service contracts to manage these projects. For the design and planning of these projects, the bilateral staff work with the recipient country's government. To make sure that nothing has been forgotten in the design and planning of projects, the CIDA staff has prepared a document that highlights the bilateral project cycle. This bilateral project cycle consists of a total of thirteen stages that should lead to better project design, operation and management. The document covers a range of elements from Canada's ODA policy framework and CIDA's various frameworks and overall strategy, to management. However, considering the purpose of this thesis, only the bilateral project cycle's approval stage, which is where project appraisal comes into play, is relevant. It is necessary to mention that in this case, as CIDA is behind the planning and design of the project, it is responsible for the undertaking of the overall project appraisal (see section 4.5.3) to ensure the success of the project. The agency is required to do a series of analyses and feasibility assessments to make 48 informed decisions on whether or not to proceed with the design and approval of projects (CIDA, 1998e: 14). According to the document Your Guide to Working with CIDA (CIDA, http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca), proposals are "...evaluated on the basis of technical excellence and financial competitiveness". According to Informant 3, all proposals must meet some basic standards and requirements, and if these are met, then the Agency selects the lowest bidder. From Informant 3's viewpoint, the Agency's choice for executing agencies is ultimately based on cost/price, which brings about questions on the issue of quality, as the lowest bidder does not necessarily have the best proposal or offer the best services. 4.5.2 Bilateral Responsive Mechanism (Unsolicited Proposals) CIDA has a set of guidelines for unsolicited bilateral projects from both the for-profit and not-for-profit sectors, which is what the Agency refers to as the "Bilateral Responsive Mechanism". Although there are two phases, the preliminary proposal and the detailed proposal, to the approval mechanism, this section will focus mainly on the latter. Overall, the detailed proposal has seven sections to it: 1) executive summary, 2) background, 3) the project, 4) the proponent(s), 5) CIDA development priorities, 6) recipient country government, and 7) appendices (CIDA, A Guide to CIDA's Bilateral Responsive Mechanism (Unsolicited Proposals), http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca). According to the Guide to CIDA's Bilateral Responsive Mechanism (Unsolicited Proposals) (CIDA, http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca), the project section should include the following: • The purpose statement and the expected results at the outcome18 and output19 levels within CIDA's results-based management (RBM) framework20, which is linked to the results-based logical framework (LFA) found in one of the annexes (see section 4.4); • The project description (scope, timeframe, main project activities, summary budget, management strategy, and lessons learned from other projects applied to the development of the proposal); • The expected benefits to the beneficiaries, the recipient country and Canada; • The anticipated project risks and corresponding mitigation and/or monitoring measures; • How the project activities will be sustainable following the project completion; and • The way in which the project conforms to the applicable requirements of the CEAA (CIDA, A Guide to CIDA 's Bilateral Responsive Mechanism (Unsolicited Proposals), http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca). Some of these elements are somewhat similar to those required to conduct SIA. The link between SIA, RBM and the LFA was already demonstrated in the Section 4.4. Also, it appears that the mitigation and/or monitoring measures mentioned apply more to the risks that specifically threaten the implementation and/or the success of the project itself, and not so much to the effects on the project beneficiaries. With SIA, it is clear that negative effects and impacts must be mitigated, and a monitoring mechanism must be thought of. According to CIDA, outcomes are short-term results of a program/project. 1 9 According to CIDA, outputs are the immediate, visible, concrete and tangible consequences of program/project inputs. 2 0 R B M will be discussed in detail in the next section. 49 4.5.3 Bilateral Project Appraisal and Approval Process According to Informant 1, project ideas are first screened to ensure that they fit within the country policy framework, which sets the overall parameters and objectives for programming in a country or region. Next, the Agency looks "...broadly at the enabling environment (policy environment, and priorities, state economic development, relationship of proposed projects to country needs, ODA policy, etc.); the target group (impact on social roles and differentiated needs of the population, differential impact of the project by gender and ways of reducing gender gaps, etc.); and a technical and capacity screening (appropriateness, capacity, etc). Project ideas are then screened against the CIDA policy base, again to ensure a 'fit'" (Informant 1, 1999). If the outcome of the screening process Informant 1 wrote about is positive, then a decision is made to do further analytical work on the project. Still according to Informant 1, this analytical work includes project appraisal, feasibility and design work; however, only the project appraisal will be looked into. The purpose of the project appraisal is to gather the information needed to make a decision on whether or not to proceed with project design and approval. It serves to give the Agency reasons to support projects, and to inform it of what specifically these projects are trying to accomplish (CIDA, Internal procedural document). As mentioned by Informant 1, "the results of this work [project appraisal analyses] lead to a decision as to whether or not to fund the proposed project". Before going any further, it is important to highlight the fact that projects valued under $500 000 do not have to undergo an appraisal. "To streamline project approval for projects up to $500,000 and to keep project planning efforts and costs commensurate to project value, the preparation of a series of separate project analyses is not mandatory" (CIDA, 1998e: 17). Why has the Agency set such a threshold? Informant 8 stated that this threshold was set because of risk: the more funds CIDA puts into supporting a project, the higher the risks involved for the Agency.. Informant 9 claimed that the threshold was in place to because "[I]f every analysis possible was done on every project... little would get done". In a nutshell, according to Informant 9, such a threshold is necessary to 'keep things happening and moving along'. As mentioned by Informant 4, project appraisal consists of four analyses: 1) socio-economic and political, 2) gender, 3) capacity, and 4) benefits to Canada and the recipient country. The socio-economic and political analysis is a three-pronged analysis, which a) reviews the social, economic and political context of a project (justification), b) asks why the situation is as it is, and c) identifies how the proposed project can contribute to the development of the target population, area(s), institution(s) or to the solution of the existing problems (CIDA, 1998e: 16). The social aspect of this analysis is meant to cover the following elements: • Basic living conditions of the population, • Social needs of the target group, • Value system and influence of culture, • Class system or any other indications of rich and poor, • Social policies and current investments in social capital, • The project's potential impact on people living in poverty, • The project's potential impact on children, • Potential for local ownership and commitment, and • The cultural "fit" of the project (CIDA internal procedural document). 50 Additionally, the social analysis assesses the "...interests (positive and negative), needs of, benefits to, and relations, among the stakeholders and the optimum roles, influences and expectations of the parties, as well as potential support or opposition (risk) to the proposed project" (CIDA internal procedural document). As for the economic aspect of the analysis, it covers: the country's macro-economic situation and economic contribution to the proposed sector(s) of involvement; the economic needs of the target . group; the economic constraints to achieving the expected benefits; the cost/benefits comparison to determine the costs of implementing and operating the proposed project as compared to benefits/results; and whether the costs are justified in comparison to the benefits that they are likely to generate (CIDA internal procedural document). Finally, the political aspect of the analysis is needed to assess: the political and decision-making systems and structures at the national and local levels and their likely influence on (or risk to) the project; the state of democratic development and respect for human rights; the divisions within the political framework by sex, land ownership, wealth, etc.; the political influence of women, ethnic groups, the poor, etc.; and the political climate and stability in the country (CIDA internal procedural document). Projects generally affect women and men differently. The gender analysis serves to ensure that gender equity is addressed in the project design, and also to ensure that a project serves the needs and interests of women, men and children. According to internal procedural document, this analysis should cover: • The differentiated needs and priorities of men and women, • Opportunities to reduce gender gaps and promote gender equity, • Measures to enable women to participate and benefit equally, • The capacity of partner government/civil society organisations to support gender equity both within their own decision makings structures and through their programming, • Specific results related to improving gender equity and gender-sensitive indicators for monitoring project performance, and • Constraints and risks to gender issues. The capacity analysis "...refers to the process that identifies the strategic (transformational) change factors and operational (transactional) change factors that need to be addressed in the targeted institution(s) to effectively develop, its/their capacity (CIDA internal procedural document). The environmental analysis serves to "...help identify environmental issues associated with the proposed initiative and to design the project in a manner that will maximize its environmental benefits and this contribute to sustainable development" (CIDA internal procedural document). This analysis complements the EIA required by the CEAA. Finally, the benefits analysis examines the overall expected benefits to both Canada and the recipient country. There are many obvious overlaps between the analyses described above and SIA. To begin, the use of the term 'benefits' in these analyses is debatable. Benefits are by definition positive, thus giving the impression that the analyses are supposed to emphasise only the good things that will happen to people if the proposed project goes through. With SIA, it is clear that both positive and negative effects and impacts must be identified. This is important because it would be unrealistic to think that a project could incur only positive effects and impact, and also because 51 knowing the adverse effects in advance allows for the elaboration of mitigation measures to eliminate or at the very least alleviate them. The project appraisal analyses do not call for the identification of negative effects (only for negative interests), and only suggest mitigation measures to overcome the risks to the successful implementation of projects. Al l in all, identifying negative effects and proper mitigation measures to eliminate or at the very least alleviate them is crucial as it allows for more comprehensive and efficient planning for the future. Further, it is important to mention that in the case of the Bilateral Directed Mechanism, it is up to the Agency to undertake all the proper analyses, whereas in the case of the bilateral responsive mechanism (unsolicited projects), it is up to the proponent. This brings about the question of how the Agency chooses to validate these criteria. What are CIDA's criteria for determining whether or not the information a project proponent provides is valid? As stated in the CIDA literature, to be finally approved, a proposal must first: a) be in conformity with the C/RPF; b) be in conformity with the requirements of the CEAA; c) have sufficient funds to devote to the proposal; and d) the proponent's contribution must be proportional to her/his commitment. Once these proposals meet the preceding requirement, the following elements are examined: • The development potential of the proposal; • The innovation or uniqueness of the proposal; • The appropriateness of the project activities; • The expected project results, the project beneficiaries; • The sustainability of the project; • The project appraisal; • Demonstrated technical capacity and strategic placement of the proponent and the recipient country partner(s) to undertake the project; • The proponent's overseas experience; • The link between the mandate or business plan of the proponent and the proposed project; • The indication of potential risks and how the proponent will mitigate or monitor them; • Demonstration that the budget represents a good value-for-money with satisfactory contribution to project cost by the proponent. • Demonstrated support for CIDA's applicable development priorities; and • Satisfactory project performance indicators, project monitoring and implementation schedules (CIDA, Undated. A Guide to CIDA's Bilateral Responsive Mechanism {UnsolicitedProposals), http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca). According to this 'checklist', project appraisal is one of thirteen elements the Agency looks at before making a decision. This brings about questions about the importance of project appraisal relative to the other elements, as the focus seems to be mostly on managerial and financial elements. Of course, other elements such as the proponent's experience and intended strategy are important, but it is necessary to give project appraisal more credit in the decision process. A firm could have all the management and financial aspects of the projects planned down to the very last detail, but what good is that if the recipient's way of life will be disturbed, or if cultural norms are offended? Project appraisal including, but not limited to, SIA should be made an important part of the decision process, as it serves to identify the many benefits, burdens and risks of projects on the recipients and their overall environment. 52 4.6 C I D A ' s M U L T I L A T E R A L B R A N C H CIDA's Multilateral Branch ensures that Canada has a voice in key international development organisations, such as the United Nations, the Commonwealth, La Francophonie, and international financial institutions. Through these organisations, CIDA's multilateral program works to promote sustainable development to reduce poverty and promote prosperity, and respect for human rights and security (CIDA's mandate). It is through this branch that Canada is able to address broad global issues that cannot effectively be dealt with solely on a national or bilateral basis. The multilateral Branch is divided into the following divisions: Policy, Planning and Management; The Food Aid Centre; International Financial Institutions; International Humanitarian Assistance; and Multilateral Technical Cooperation. Within the branch, there is no definite set of procedures used to select which project to support. Projects are supported based on their compliance or conformity with Canada's foreign policy objectives, as well as with CIDA's mandate and strategies. 4.7 C I D A ' s CANADIAN PARTNERSHIP B R A N C H The Canadian Partnership Branch promotes partnerships between organisations in Canada and developing countries to support sustainable development and reduce poverty in the developing world. The Branch provides grants and contributions to support Canadian partner organisations, which are responsible for the design, planning and implementation of the development programs and projects. To enhance ownership and achieve leverage, Canadian partner organisations are required to contribute financial resources, goods and/or services to their development initiatives. They are also required to ensure the active participation of their developing country counterparts and to demonstrate that their activities contribute to sustainable capacity building. The Canadian Partnership Branch is divided into five specialised divisions. 1) The Industrial Cooperation Program (Canadian businesses) 2) The Institutional Cooperation Division (Canadian universities, colleges, co-operatives, associations and unions). 3) The Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) Division (Canadian and international NGOs). 4) The Youth Action Division (international internship projects which provide Canadian youth with international development experience). 5) The Policy, Strategic Planning and Operations Division (internal management and operation of the Branch). Within this branch, CIDA's supports projects in the form of funding, which is based on cost sharing between the Agency and the partner organisation or institution. Ownership of the project, however, remains with the initiating partner organisation (CIDA, Your Guide to Working with CIDA, http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca). 53 4.7.1 Industrial Cooperation Program (ICP) According to the ICP Information Kit (1997), the ICP encourages the establishment of long-term links that facilitate and support sustainable socio-economic development between the Canadian private sector with partners and clients in developing countries (CIDA. 1997e). As stated in CIDA's ICP information kit, projects must meet the following criteria in order to be funded: • Include a partner or a client in a developing country who will bring a real contribution to the project. • Have an element of technology, knowledge or know-how transfer that will allow supporting sustainable development. • Have, for the targeted country, advantages such as the improvement of the quality of life (both environmentally and socially), job creation, increased production, improvement of technical know-how, import substitution, widening export possibilities, entry of foreign currency. • Have, for Canada, advantages such as the provision of production goods, equipment, component, accessories, raw materials; provision of professional or technical services, the expansion of preservation of foreign markets; the creation or preservation of employment. • Have ulterior probable financing that will allow the implementation of the project without CIDA's financial participation. • Be elaborated in such a way so as to increase social and environmental benefits, and to minimise negative social and environmental impacts (CIDA, 1997e). Project proposals must contain, a feasibility study, an assessment of the project's impact on the bio-physical and social environment, a plan for the integration of women in all project stages, and a plan in anticipation of training needs (CIDA, 1997e). Finally, to be accepted, a project must demonstrate: a) quantifiable benefits for the targeted country and Canada in terms of employment, sales and profits, and of technology transfer; b) an acceptable level of risk, c) the contribution of the applicant and of its partner in all phases of the project; and d) a good technical approach, including the firm's experience in that type of project, and work methods at the technical level as well as at the for the assessment of social and environmental impacts (CIDA, 1997e). According to Informant 8, in this Division the approval process is quite similar to that of the Bilateral Branch in that it is done on a project basis: proposals are reviewed, analysed, and then approved or rejected. What comes out of the Agency's criteria for projects submitted to the ICP, is that there is a social awareness. Applicants must look into effects not only on the bio-physical environment, but also on the social environment. Additionally, applicants must pay particular attention to women, how they will potentially be affected, and how they can be fully integrated in stages of the proposed project. What is most noticeable here is that social considerations are clearly and explicitly referred to. 54 4.7.2 Institutional Cooperation Division (ICD) The ICD "...aims to develop individual and institutional capacities in all sectors of civil society in developing countries. Institutional cooperation programs emphasize human resource development and the potential of women, men and youth from various communitites" (CIDA, Undated. Information Kit on Institutional Cooperation Program). Although the ICD has several different branches, all proposals must meet the following criteria: • Be consistent with the Canadian ODA policies, mandate and priorities as well as CIDA's objectives. • Present activities that will contribute to capacity building and institutional strengthening of partner institutions in developing countries. • Contain objectives that are clearly consistent with the mandate of the Canadian institution and the partner institution in the developing country. • Indicate the measure of leverage and mutual benefits of the proposed activities in developing countries and Canada. • Describe how the Canadian public will be made aware of the proposed intervention. • Identify the sustainable results expected upon completion of this intervention. • Demonstrate the soundness of the Canadian institution's financial situation. • Indicate how women and youth will be integrated into the project and how gender equity will be taken into consideration. • Outline the project's environmental impact assessment. • Conform with CIDA's cost-sharing policy. • Indicate the evaluation process planned to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the activities. • Specify the financial participation of the developing country partner institution. (CIDA. 19??. Information Kit on Institutional Cooperation Program) Informant 8 explained that proposals are looked over by committees who use pre-set criteria as a reference. Proposals are then approved or rejected by the vice-president of the Division or the Minister depending on the nature of the project and the amount requested. Once again it is clear that social considerations are part of the criteria to review and analyse proposals that are submitted to the ICD. The referrals to the Agency's six ODA priorities and to women and youth are undoubtedly social elements that are expected to be taken into account by proponents in their project proposals. 4.7.3 Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) Division The purpose of this division of the Canadian Partnership Branch is to support projects of Canadian NGOs in developing countries. According to the Guide du mecanisme de projets ONG (1996: 1), these projects: • Must meet Canadian priorities in terms of development. • Are normally implemented in partnership with NGOs from developing countries. 55 • Must reinforce the capacity of communities, organisations and of individuals to progress socially and economically. • Must promote gender equality and the role of women. • Must not harm the environment. • • Must facilitate autonomy and long-term viability. • Must give Canadians the opportunity to better understand the issues of development, and to participate in development activities in Canada and overseas. Informant 8 described the approval process of this Division as very similar to that of the ICD. 4.8 CIDA AND SIA According to CIDA's mandate, it is clear that the Agency is striving to achieve sustainability in the broadest sense of the word, through its development programs and activities. It is also clear that the Agency takes into consideration social and cultural factors as the people of the developing countries it works are the targets of most interventions. However, it seems that gender equality and concerns with women are the only social and cultural factors, for which the Agency has formulated distinct and explicit guidelines, protocols and tools. Nonetheless, that does not mean that the Agency is not concerned with social and cultural factors, and that is one of the key findings of this section. The Agency may not have a distinct SIA protocol for dealing with social and cultural effects and concerns, but it does take these factors into consideration. Proof of that can be found in the many different policies, strategies, guidelines and procedural documents the Agency relies on. Several of the informants corroborated that although CIDA does not have a distinct protocol for SIA, it relies on its different policies, strategies, guidelines and requirements, most of which have elements in common and overlaps with SIA. Consequently, at the moment, the Agency's equivalent of SIA is very fragmented, divided amongst various policies, guidelines, strategies and requirements such as project appraisal. Almost all of the informants interviewed suggested that CIDA should have a distinct SIA protocol, and that it should be made an integral part of its project appraisal requirements. Informant 5 thinks that although some aspects of SIA are covered in the CIDA Gender Assessment Handbook, the Agency should have a distinct protocol for SIA. To have an explicit and distinct protocol for SIA would allow moving away from the operational confusion and fragmentation, by helping to piece together the sparse elements attributable to SIA that can be found throughout the Agency's policies, guidelines, strategies and requirements. This would also allow simplifying and making clear the distinction between the different types of analyses that are part of project appraisal. Informant 8 also made a good point when stressing that CIDA is a highly bureaucratic institution, and that it is necessary to simplify and not add to bureaucratic processes. Also, it appears that CIDA puts gender in a stand-alone category that has cross-cutting relevance with other issues/questions and policies (Informant 7, 1999). Clearly, separating gender from other social and cultural factors is an approach that indicates the importance of gender and gender-related issues within the Agency. However, burying social and cultural factors in the Agency's many policies and mechanisms is probably not the best way to go. From that same standpoint, it would be a good idea to have one mechanism to explicitly deal with social and cultural factors, to indicate their importance. Indeed, social and cultural factors and issues other than those that are gender-related should also be dealt with specifically. Further, Informant 8 56 made yet another good point when suggesting that an explicit protocol for SIA would riot necessarily add to the quality of what the Agency does. Indeed, if the Agency is content with its actual procedures and the way in which in takes into account social and cultural factors and looks into the effects of the projects it supports on these aspects, then why change things? This thesis also found that although the Agency's mandate acts as a common thread that all the branches rely on to guide and shape their procedures, they nonetheless all have very different protocols and ways of doing things. As stated by Informants 2, 5, 6 and 8, the Bilateral, Multilateral and Partnership Branches all have different procedures and mechanisms for appraising projects. This fragmentation of the Agency's procedures has the potential of being a source of administrative complications: proof of this can be found in the difficulty the author of this thesis had to obtain straightforward information about project appraisal within all three branches. There should be a common project appraisal skeleton that would apply to all branches. This could potentially facilitate communication among the branches, simplify bureaucratic processes, limit the amount of staff and cut costs, and make the dissemination of information much easier. 57 5. CASE STUDIES 5.1 SELECTION OF CASE STUDIES The purpose of this chapter is to look at some CIDA-supported projects in the light of the analytical framework formulated in Chapter 3. The projects chosen are the World Bank's Second Subic Bay Freeport Project to which CIDA contributed through its Multilateral Branch, and the Programme andin de developpement cooperatif21 (PADECO) in Peru and Bolivia that was supported by CIDA's Bilateral Branch. In the former case, the project's SIA prepared by an external consultant was reviewed. In the latter case, the project proposal including the Analyse du cadre logique (LFA), the Analyse sociale (Social Analysis), and the Analyse genre et developpement (Gender and Development Analysis) were analysed. This is because the proponent did not undertake an actual SIA, and the analyses done instead were predominantly descriptive, as they provided overviews of the situation in Peru and Bolivia. Nonetheless, the framework was applied to this case in the same manner as in the first case study to show what an SIA — had there been one — could have touched on. 5.2 SECOND SUBIC B A Y FREEPORT PROJECT, PHILIPPINES The Second Subic Bay Freeport Project is a World Bank project that CIDA contributed to through its Multilateral Branch. The Agency agreed to support this project because it met its (and the Canadian Government's) goals. Indeed, the project touched on infrastructure provision, which in turn is linked to the development of the private sector, meeting basic human needs, as well as to democracy, human rights and good governance, all of which are CIDA ODA priorities. 5.2.1 Project Description The Second Subic Bay Freeport Project is phase two of a project to convert the former US Subic Bay Naval Base in the Philippines into a Freeport. The First Subic Bay Freeport Project consisted of".. .infrastructure rehabilitation and upgrading, and technical assistance to strengthen the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) and develop an environmental management plan" (World Bank. 1997. Project Name Philippines-Second Subic Bay Freeport Project (@). http://www.worldbank.org/pics/pid/ph40981.txt). This first project was very successful; the number of new investors, and the rapid growth of the area served as testimony to that effect. 2 1 The Andean Cooperative Development Program. 58 Unfortunately, this growth was putting enormous pressure on the area's infrastructure and of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority's (SBMA) management capacity. Consequently, the Second Subic Bay Freeport Project was designed to meet these pressures by providing new water supply, power distribution and transport infrastructure and institutional support to SBMA and the Subic Bay Ecology Center, in addition to improving the area's solid waste disposal system. Overall, the Second Subic Bay Freeport Project, which is meant to be carried out by the SBMA over 3 1/2 years (January 1997-July 2000), is comprised of four components: 1) Institutional Support to strengthen the SBMA and its Ecology Center; 2) Water Supply to provide treated water in the secured area, Olongapo City and Subic Town; 3) Power Distribution to rationalise and consolidate the power distribution network of Olongapo-SBMA franchise area; and 4) Roads, bridges and related infrastructure to improve road capacity, access, and related infrastructure " (World Bank. 1997. Project Name Philippines-Second Subic Bay Freeport Project (@). http://www.worldbank.org/pics/pid/ph40981.txt). A Canadian firm, Wardrop Engineering Inc., was given the contract to undertake the project SIA. This included identifying the social issues and concerns that would arise from the implementation of the project. 5.2.2 Analysis The SIA document for the project was composed of five sections: 1) introduction, 2) socio-economic area profile, 3) regulatory framework, 4) the SIA itself, and 5) conclusions and recommendations. The SIA section contained smaller SIAs for each of the intended interventions. Generally speaking, the analytical framework elaborated in Chapter 3 was easily applicable to this case. Indeed, the analysis of the Second Subic Bay Freeport Project SIA was conducted using the list of questions out of the framework — which were themselves inspired from the literature — to come up with themes or subheadings illustrative of what should be included in an SIA. This slightly fragmented approach served to identify the SIA's strengths and weaknesses under each of the categories (or subheadings), which in turn led to an evaluation of the overall study. a) The Purpose The purpose of the project was not fully explained in the SIA, although the purpose of the study itself was. It is obvious that the SIA was written with the underlying assumption that the reader would consult the project description beforehand. Nonetheless, the consultants could have provided the details of the project components targeted by the SIA to ensure that readers are well aware of what these components are and what they entail. b) Identifying Stakeholders Stakeholders for the project were identified in relation to the interventions that would potentially affect them (i.e., they were identified separately in each of the smaller SIAs). These stakeholders were: 59 1) The farmers, water users, residents, and landowners in the area where the water supply scheme would be taking place; 2) The residents of the Subic Bay Freeport (SBF) in the case of the sewerage and drainage project; 3) Al l the scavengers that relied on the waste dumps of the SBF, as well as the occupants of the New Cabalan secondary landfdl site; 4) The Pastolan Aeta22 community in the case of the roads and bridges scheme; 5) The SBMA and the Subic Bay Ecology Center for the institutional capacity-building; and 6) The squatters on the shores of the Redondo Peninsula in the case of the development of infrastructure in that same peninsula. Finally, squatters and urban poor women were recognised, although the latter were not really referred to explicitly in other parts of the study. c) Gender Analysis Although in the introduction it is clearly stated that "...gender analysis was applied to the assessment of all project components to ensure the components' different impacts on women and men are understood and planned for" (p.l), there was no real evidence of this in the SIA study as such. It is clearly stated in the literature that SIAs should have a gender component, as it is a fact that women (and children and the elderly) are more often than not affected differently than men, as they have different interests and priorities. The only allusion to women found was in the Solid Waste Management section of the SIA where the consultants suggested that women be "...adequately represented from both the re-settlers and host community, and encouraged to be actively involved in resettlement planning and implementation" (p. 32). The gender analysis component should have been woven throughout the SIA to indicate how women would have been affected by the project. d) Socio-Economic Variables Using the table of Social and Cultural Variables (Table 3.2) from Chapter 3 as a reference, it appears that the surveys used to gather information clearly did not touch on power structures, gender roles, cultural norms and values, traditions, etc. For the project, three distinct socio-economic surveys were administered to: 1) the New Cabalan landfill site scavengers, 2) the occupants of the New Cabalan landfill site property, and 3) the Pastolan Aeta village. The surveys linked to the New Cabalan landfill revolved around education (level of education, capability to read and write), household composition, employment and/or income-generating activities, housing and land occupancy, income, and access to utilities. The survey that targeted the occupants of the New Cabalan landfill site property did, however, inquire on the gender of both the owner of the dwelling and the head of household. In the case of the survey that targeted the Pastolan Aeta village, the questions were essentially the same as in the two others with the exception that they touched upon: a) building materials, b) the people's perceptions about relocation, development in the vicinity of their village, land title and access to forest resources, and c) community participation (their decision-making process). Al l in all, the information gathered was mostly of a socio-economic nature; however, it is made quite clear in the literature that social and cultural norms, values and traditions should be looked into. The Pastolan Aeta are aboriginal peoples living on the outskirts of the forests surrounding the SBF. 60 e) Regulatory Framework The consultants went over the Filipino and World Bank regulatory frameworks pertaining to involuntary resettlement and to the protection of indigenous people. In addition to that, the consultants also took a quick look at resettlement experiences in the Philippines. This step was useful in that it helped in shaping the recommendations for both the Roads and Bridges, and the Waste Disposal Management schemes. A serious shortcoming was the failure to cover issues of entitlement to land. There was no effort to include governmental procedures for expropriation, for example. f) Alternatives Interestingly, although development alternatives were not looked into for all project phases, they were considered in the section of the assessment that covered the roads and bridges scheme. The alternatives consisted of different locations for roads. Furthermore, these alternatives were presented to the Aeta Pastolan people who were identified as being likely to be most affected by the construction of roads in the targeted area. g) Resettlement Considerations The SIA's section on solid waste management is one of the most complete of the study. Indeed, that section covered how the scavengers and occupants of the New Cabalan landfill site were going to be affected, and for both cases suggested mitigation measures (see Table 5.1). As part of the mitigation measures, the consultants recommended the formulation of a Resettlement Action Plan, and of a Livelihood Plan suggesting wage-earning alternatives to scavengers. These two mitigation measures were complemented with a series of suggestions pertaining to what these plans should contain. h) Recognising 'Ethinic Minorities' The component of the SIA that focused on the Pastolan Aeta ethnic community, and how it would be affected by the construction of a road was yet another of the study's strengths. Several alternatives for roads were presented, and the survey showed that there were inquiries into the community's perceptions pertaining to these options. Moreover, as a mitigation measure, the consultants suggested the formulation of an Indigenous People's Development Plan, and made recommendations pertaining to the sectors that it (the Plan) would have to make provisions for. i) Effects In the SIA there were not enough (if any) distinctions between short-, and long-term effects. As mentioned in Chapters 2 and 3, it is necessary to anticipate both types of effects as: 1) their occurrence is not limited in time; and b) their considerations have implications for planning and achieving goals of sustainability. Also, there were very few distinctions made between direct, indirect, or cumulative effects. Most effects mentioned fell in the direct category, while only a few could be viewed as indirect, and none as cumulative. The impacts stated were generally very vague and broad, and often incomplete. The SIA did not go in enough depth; and appeared to be somewhat superficial. Furthermore, it seemed that many of the needed analyses and supplementary studies were under way at the time when the SIA was done, and thus were not included in the study. Overall, more effort should have.been put into the identification and determination of effects. 61 j) Spread Effect The SIA did not cover spread effects in any way. The study did not mention whether or not the project as a whole or its individual components would have effects and impacts on people outside the targeted area and its population. k) Social and Cultural Factors Social and cultural factors were not explicitly covered in the SIA. This was unfortunate as the Pastolan Aeta community and the scavengers surely had traditions, norms and values of their own that might have been affected by the project. 1) Mitigation Measures The consultants proposed several mitigation measures for some projects components. Table 5.1 illustrates the proposed mitigations in relation to the individual components of the project. Table 5.1: Proposed Mitigation Measures Project Component Proposed Mitigation Measures Water Supply • Adequate compensation at full market rate for people adversely affected • A public information program • Added benefits of improved power, water supply and road access • Monitoring program • Action plan for mitigation • Construction undertaken in short lengths to minimise disruptions Sewerage and Drainage • A public information program • Construction undertaken in short lengths to minimise disruptions Solid Waste Management • Preparation of a Resettlement Action Plan • Preparation of a Livelihood Plan (alternatives for scavengers) Power Distribution • Develop a land acquisition and compensation or resettlement plan23 Roads and Bridges • The elaboration of an Indigenous People's Development Plan Institutional Development • Strengthening the Ecology Center's capacity to undertake socio-economic analysis, and design and implement related socio-economic development programs m) Residual Effects The SIA did not touch on residual impacts, which means that no information was provided pertaining to unavoidable effects or leftover effects following the implementation of mitigation measures. Nonetheless, the literature and the analytical framework call for the identification of residual effects, so as to allow to make provisions for them in project planning (this is for more comprehensive and efficient planning). n) Provisions for Monitoring Apart from the monitoring program suggested as a mitigation measure for the water supply component of the project, there were no other provisions or even suggestions of monitoring. Only once the exact routing is determined, and the project goes ahead. Also, chosen routes necessitate SIAs. 62 Perhaps, this was because the project had a holistic monitoring mechanism that was not limited to the SIA component of the project, but rather embraced all aspects of it. Nonetheless, monitoring is emphasised as an important part of impact assessment in the literature because it helps identify unanticipated effects and verify the accuracy of predicted effects. 5.2.3 Final Comments The SIA done for the Second Subic Bay Freeport Project touched on many of the elements noted as important in the SIA analytical framework. Although there were some deficiencies in the study itself, it had several strong points that serve as good examples (i.e., the Resettlement Action Plan, the Livelihood Plan, and the Indigenous People's Development Plan) for future assessors to look at. Indeed, the plans suggested appeared to be the fruits of careful thought and consideration in relation to adversely affected groups. The layout of the SIA was also well thought out, as it allowed looking at the effects of each of the project components individually. However, it would also have been a good idea to take a look at the project as a whole, to account for other types of impact. As is stated in the literature, SIA is supposed to be comprehensive. The area of the SIA that would have needed the most work is the identification of effects: indirect and cumulative effects were not anticipated, and as for the direct and a number of indirect effects, the assessors only indicated their probable occurrence. As mentioned in the literature and in the framework, it is necessary to look at the kind, scope, significance, and occurrence of effects to allow for more effective and comprehensive planning. Finally, the SIA carried contained some informational gaps, as all the information needed was not tabulated or available at the time when the study was completed. The consultants should have stated in the introduction of the study that there were informational gaps, or that the study was a provisional one to be replaced later (they could have described the SIA as a work in progress, which is perfectly legitimate). Several authors have argued that impact assessments are meant to be iterative. 5.3 PROGRAMME ANDIN DE DEVELOPPEMENT COOPERATIF In the previous case study, an actual SIA was undertaken. This is probably because the leading agency responsible for the project, the World Bank, required it. In some CIDA-funded projects, SIAs as such are not required; instead, analyses such as those mentioned as constituting the bilateral project appraisal are used (see Section 4.5.3). However, nobody is stopping proponents from undertaking impact assessments such as SIA if they feel they are necessary; the important thing is that, in the end, they meet the CIDA requirements. Nonetheless, in this section, the 'Social Analysis' and the 'Gender Analysis' of the project were reviewed to illustrate how they relate to SIA. The PADECO in Bolivia and Peru was approved for funding by CIDA in the mid-1990s. The goal of this five-year project was to contribute to poverty reduction in rural areas of Bolivia and Peru by strengthening the private sector's productive capacity. The project proposal was submitted to CIDA's Americas Branch (Bilateral Branch) by the Societe de cooperation pour le developpement international (SOCODEVI). The clientele of the project consisted of nine 63 agricultural co-operative centres: four in Peru that produced coffee, cotton and olives, and five in Bolivia that produced beans, and dealt in the commercialisation of inputs and of quinoa. In addition to these partners, the SOCODEVI worked in collaboration with its funding counterparts in both countries, organisations specialised in the promotion of women, intervenors from the private banking sector, as well as with public and quasi-public organisms. A preliminary overview of the analyses revealed that, even combined, they were not the equivalent of SIA. The analyses were purely descriptive and did not attempt to identify effects of any kind. For this reason the analytical framework was not applied in exactly the same way as in the Subic Bay case. Instead, the SIA analytical framework serves to illustrate what could have been done had the SOCODEVI chosen to undertake an actual full-fledged SIA. 5.3.1 Project Description The purpose of the PADECO was to sustainably strengthen a total of nine agricultural co-operative centres in Peru and Bolivia. The project essentially consisted of the following three interventions: 1) The provision support to the overall (national) co-operative movement (macro level); 2) The strengthening of the centres themselves (meso level), and 3) The provision of support to the social foundation of the agricultural co-operative centres (micro level). First, the project aimed to facilitate the development of the co-operative movement at the national level by updating both countries' regulatory and public structure frameworks for the co-operative movement. Ultimately, this was meant to facilitate and to simplify the enactment of the Co-operative Law, as well as to supply common socio-political and economic services for the centres. Preliminary studies revealed the existence of key factors inhibiting the sustainable development of the centres. Among these factors were: a) deficient training of personnel and managerial staff; b) non-existent or inadequate management tools; c) economic services that do not pay or pay very little; e) difficult or non-existent access to credit; and f) weak participation of members and women. Consequently, the project's second intervention seeked to make these centres more efficient, effective and profitable through the conception and implementation Co-operative Enterprise Plans (CEP) for each of the nine centres. As family agricultural enterprises constitute the economic and social foundation of the co-operative centres, two factors, the participation of women and the preservation of land capital, were identified as being key to the development of the centres. The CEPs were equipped with a component to provide for these two factors. The strategy for the participation of women focused on a) their training for the management of the family enterprises, and b) the establishment of a credit fund to support small production projects. Also, in the spirit of protecting the environment, the farmers were to be trained a) to rationally use agricultural inputs, b) to optimally use their lots, and c) to use ecological techniques to fertilise crops and to deal with insects. 64 In light of the SOCODEVI's history of supporting the development of agricultural co-operative centres, CIDA provided the organisation with funding to undertake the preliminary studies for the PADECO. The organisation conducted political and economic, social, environmental, institutional, commercial, financial, and risk analyses. These studies made it possible to 1) pinpoint the problems that characterised these countries' rural areas, and 2) identify the main constraints affecting the economic, social, environmental, commercial, political, and gender in development elements of the co-operative movement. These studies further allowed the identification of the economic potential of each of the centres, as well as their strengths and weaknesses. 5.3.2 Analysis Given that seven analyses were conducted, only those that were considered directly related to SIA were referred to for the purposes of this study. Indeed, the Analyse sociale (Social Analysis) and the Analyse genre et afe've/oppement (Women in Development Analyses) were reviewed. It is important to reiterate that, although all the analyses done for this project are complementary, the focus of this thesis is primarily on SIA and on analyses that specifically touch on social and cultural aspects of people's lives. The social analysis written for the PADECO project did not seem to be the equivalent of a full-fledged SIA. It appears that the analyses the SOCODEVI undertook were merely tools to paint a portrait of the general environment in Peru and Bolivia by relying on a mixture of quantitative (statistics) and qualitative (descriptive) data. The social analysis gave a portrait of the social environment of both countries, and provided information on the following aspects of the general population of both countries: a) Population (indigenous, movement and distribution, and growth and structure), b) Economically active population, c) Employment structure and areas of activity, d) Unemployment and underemployment, e) Income, f) Education, g) Social investments, and h) Access to services (health, education, water and electricity). Also, each social description contained a section strictly dedicated to information on the PADECO's target populations. The information provided in these sections touched on project description, the challenges and constraints to the success of the project and on equity issues (gender, ethnicity, and cities vs. rural areas) in relation to access to services. The same can be said of the gender in development analysis, which only served to depict a) a general portrait of Andean women's situation, b) a portrait of rural women in the Andes, and c) the issues that surround women in the Andean countries. 5.3.3 PADECO.. . What Could Have Been Done through SIA The following section indicates what the SOCODEVI could have done to have a more complete and SIA-like final product. This section was done with the analytical framework for SIA from Chapter 3 as a reference, and using the same format as for the previous case study. 65 a) The Purpose Question(s): What is the purpose of the project What is the purpose of the assessment? What problems or issues are being dealt with? Here, two things could have been done. First, the purpose of the project, "to contribute to poverty reduction in rural areas of Bolivia and Peru by strengthening the private sector's productive capacity", could have been reiterated and elaborated on to ensure that the readers of the assessment were well aware of what the project entailed. Second, the purpose of the assessment itself could have also been stated, in the spirit of informing the reader on the reasons why an assessment had been undertaken. All in all, this would have served to inform the reader and eliminate any chance of confusion as to the purpose and the motivation of the study. b) Identifying Stakeholders Question(s) to ask: Who are the stakeholders in this intervention (beneficiaries, victims and/or benefactors)? Who is involved? Based on the general information provided in the SOCODEVI's proposal to CIDA, the stakeholders could have been identified as being the: • SOCODEVI's funding counterparts in both Peru and Bolivia, • Organisations specialising in the promotion of women, • Intervenors from the private banking sector, • Public and para-public organisms, • Government, • Individual farmers, and • Co-operatives. Of course, this would not have been a complete list (this list is based on only a general knowledge of the project), but the SOCODEVI would have been able to identify all stakeholders considering its overall role in the project. c) Socio-Economic Variables Question(s): Who are the people in the targeted population? What are good indicators/variables to identify and measure effects? The social and gender in development analyses the SOCODEVI had done would fit in this category as they offered much information pertaining to the social environment of Peru and Bolivia. The areas the information touched on in the analyses were already listed in the previous section. d) Social and Cultural Factors Question(s): What social and cultural factors/elements will affect the ability of the stakeholders to participate in, or benefit from the project? What are the stakeholders' needs, concerns, interests and perceptions? To make sure that all social and cultural factors would have been taken into account, there could have been inquiries into the people's (i.e., farmers and other people affected by the PADECO) beliefs, perceptions, traditions, cultural norms and values. The analyses did not contain any such information. 66 e) Regulatory Framework Question(s): What is the locality's regulatory framework? How will it help or hinder the implementation of the project? The SOCODEVI could have elicited the two countries' regulatory frameworks pertaining to agricultural co-operatives as part of the assessment. This is research the SOCODEVI had done anyway, as its macro level strategies focused partly on bringing reforms to the legal and regulatory frameworks to make them more conducive to the sustainable development of the co-operative movement. The SOCODEVI would only have needed to focus on the elements of the laws and regulations that would facilitate and hinder the implementation and success of the PADECO. f) Alternatives Question(s): What are reasonable alternatives to deal with the concerns at hand? Taking a look at alternatives could have helped determine if the project being proposed was the best option to achieve set developmental goals. At the very least, the project proposal could have been compared to the status quo. These elements were not included in the assessment. g) Effects Question(s): What are the general effects of the intervention? Who will be affected? The consequences (both positive and negative) of the project could have been anticipated with the help of the different stakeholders. Effects and impacts could have been looked at at the individual, household, community, regional, and national levels. This could have been done with several of the research methods mentioned in Chapter 2, and also by looking art past cases of programs and projects targeting agricultural co-operatives. h) Gender Analysis Question(s): What are the effects of the intervention on women? As mentioned in the previous section, the gender in development analysis, depicted a) a general portrait of Andean women's situation, b) a portrait of rural women in the Andes, and c) the issues that surround women in the Andean countries. This could have been integrated with the section of the assessment that focuses on social and cultural variables. Al l the SOCODEVI would have needed to do was to anticipate if and how women would be affected differently than men by the project. i) Recognising 'Ethnic Minorities' Question(s): What will be the effects of the intervention on vulnerable groups? The 'minority' or 'ethnic' groups having been recognised and identified in the earlier stages of the assessment (in the social and cultural variables section), it would have been necessary to see how exactly the project would have affected them particularly. j) Resettlement Considerations Question(s): Must groups of people be displaced? What compensation mechanisms can they be offered? If for the successful implementation of the PADECO, communities had needed to be displaced, the SOCODEVI would have had to look into ways to compensate and mitigate inconveniences and losses for these people. This was not clearly stated in the documents. 67 k) Spread Effects Question(s): Are any effects likely to occur outside of the targeted population or area? It would have been necessary to look into whether or not the PADECO would have affected people and groups of people outside of the target population. This could have been done with the help of stakeholders as well. 1) Mitigation Measures Question(s): How can unavoidable adverse effects be eliminated or alleviated? Mitigation measures would have had to be thought of in collaboration with the stakeholders to alleviate or eliminate adverse effects. If, for example, it would have been predicted that the implementation of the PADECO would have resulted in an increased production of coffee, prices on the international market would be likely to be affected. To mitigate such a negative effect, the SOCODEVI could have proposed some alternative crops for farmers to produce, or the assessment could have suggested a planting and harvesting schedule. m) Residual Effects Question(s): What are the residual effects? Are there any compensation mechanisms? It would have been necessary to look into identifying the leftover negative effects after the implementation of mitigation measures. In the case where the SOCODEVI would have proposed the production of another crop to farmers to counter the potential fall in prices, some residual effects could have been increased investment and work for the farmers. n) Monitoring Question(s): Is there a follow-up mechanism? Finally, the SOCODEVI should have made provisions for monitoring to make sure that mitigation measures were being properly implemented, to verify the accuracy of predicted effects, and to make sure that all new information was integrated into the SIA and dealt with consequently. 5.3.4 Final Comments Clearly the materials produced in the project documents do not equate a full-fledged SIA. However, these analyses can be linked to SIA in that they can be considered a cross between the scoping and problem identification and profiling steps of the process. Indeed, the analyses did not seek to predict the project's potential effects on people; and instead, only focused on describing the current situation and identifying the risks that could have potentially inhibited the implementation of the project. The purpose of the project appraisal step is to a) to give CIDA a reason to invest in projects, and b) identify what the projects should accomplish (CIDA, internal procedural document). The PADECO's project appraisal analyses did not identify what the results of the project should be24. By describing the situation in these countries, the SOCODEVI only gave CIDA reasons to support their project. These analyses were incomplete according to the CIDA requirements. It is 2 4 It would be unfair not to mention that the project's L F A provides some information on the project's expected effects on the target population, such as the increase of household income, and the improvement of the satisfaction of the basic needs of the co-operative members' families. This serves to show that although it is not often done, social and cultural effects can be included in the L F A . 68 interesting to ask why the Agency agreed to support the project. Is it because the SOCODEVI had a long history of successfully implementing projects in Latin America? The SOCODEVI did not conduct an SIA. However, section 5.3.3 served to demonstrate that the undertaking of a full-fledged SIA would have been possible, based on the analytical framework for SIA. Already the SOCODEVI had done a big part of the work by going through the scoping stage, and all the work the organisation would have needed to be done would have touched on the anticipation of effects (all types), the establishment of mitigation measures, and monitoring. 69 6. CONCLUSIONS All development projects, including those building infrastructure or involving sophisticated technology transfer, affect people (Coady International Institute, 1989:7) 6.1 C I D A AND S I A As stated in previous chapters, SIA serves to predict the effects (short- and long-term, positive and negative) of policies, program, projects and events on people's lives by using participatory methods to democratise the decision-making process. SIA can be considered a means of moving away from top-down planning approaches to more people-oriented approaches that strive to achieve success not only on an economic and political level, but on a social and cultural level as well. Theoretically, SIA involves the people and makes them part of the process; it makes them feel empowered and more responsible for the decisions being made. This having been said, why does CIDA not have an explicit protocol for SIA? If the reason is increased economic costs for SIA, then it is necessary to highlight that everything has its cost (whether quantifiable or not), and the Agency must ponder what the cost to invest in the undertaking of SIA (or SIA-related procedures) truly is when it invariably leads to money saved in the long run. With SIA and other types of impact assessment, one must spend money to save money. The prospect of investing more at the beginning of the project should not be intimidating, as it will usually pay off in the long run. As stated in the quote at the beginning of the chapter, all development projects affect people, which is all the more reason for CIDA to give more attention to the social and cultural dimensions of the development initiatives it supports. It has been suggested that the RBM and LFA processes replace SIA. If RBM and LFA are designated as substitutes for SIA, the Agency should acknowledge — for the benefit of its staff and of project proponents — that these tools (RBM and LFA) do not, as they stand now, replace SIA. Nonetheless, RBM and the LFA could very well lend themselves to meet the same goals as SIA. They could be made more holistic, so as to: a) take into consideration both intended and unintended effects (not only expected benefits as is the case now), and b) better capture social and cultural dimensions of development projects. Sure they are first and foremost management tools that are more concerned with achieving intended results than with identifying negative 70 effects and impacts. Nonetheless they are not bad tools in themselves, and could potentially serve to take into account the social and cultural dimensions of CIDA-supported development initiatives in a much more comprehensive manner in the future. If the fact that the CEAA already calls for the consideration of social and cultural factors/effects is the argument explaining why CIDA does not have a distinct protocol for SIA, then it is important to stress that the Act only takes into account social and cultural effects that are directly caused by, or correlated with the environmental changes induced by the proposed project. This infers that the social and cultural effects that are provided for in the CEAA are very narrow in scope, thus leaving many other ones unaccounted for. Additionally, if the fact that SIA is not legislated (as is EIA) is mentioned, then it is important to ponder whether or not it is necessary to formulate a text of law dedicated to SIA to ensure that agencies, organisations and governments are being socially and culturally responsible and accountable. If the CIDA claims that it does not have a distinct SIA protocol because it calls for comparable analyses in its project appraisal procedures/mechanisms, or because the Agency already calls for the consideration of social and cultural factors in its various policies and statements., then it is necessary to reiterate that these mechanisms are not comprehensive enough and that they only touch on social and cultural factors in a fragmented way. The absence of one clear set of requirements may create confusion for project proponents, as well as imply heavier more complicated bureaucratic processes for the Agency staff. To get an SIA out of the project analyses, one must piece together different sections of the different studies/analyses. One solution to this could be to pool together all the scattered requirements, to obtain one specific set of guidelines and requirements for taking into account the social and cultural dimensions of development projects. CIDA should realise that the achievement of its mandate may be more difficult with the methods it uses now. For the Agency to reach its goals, it should conduct and require the proper studies and proper methods to ensure that it supports development projects for which: a) effects are equitably distributed, b) people participate in decisions that affect their lives, c) there is an awareness and sensitivity to cultural factors, and d) negative effects are eliminated or alleviated while positive effects are emphasised. These are elements that should be acknowledged and somehow integrated into project proposal requirements. It has already been established that CIDA does not have a specific protocol for SIA, and that its procedures identifiable with SIA are scattered throughout its procedures and policies. It is important to question whether or not the Agency's procedures are appropriate and effective in considering social and cultural factors. The application of the analytical framework on the PADECO has served to show that although the project was funded by CIDA (approved), the proponent — the SOCODEVI — had not met the Agency's requirements. This can serve as an indicator that CIDA's requirements or criteria for reviewing project proposals are not being enforced. Of course, this could have very well been an isolated case, and it would be necessary to apply the framework on a larger range of project proposals to make generalisations. Nonetheless, based on the literature review, on the results of the application of the framework, 25 • * and on the comments of the informants, the formulation SIA-type procedures in CIDA is Not necessarily a specific protocol for SIA as such. 71 suggested. This thesis has not provided any substantive proof that the formulation of a distinct protocol for SIA would really improve the Agency's procedures and project results. However, this thesis has demonstrated that CIDA does take into consideration social and cultural factors, although not exactly in the same way as does SIA. The Agency already uses some tools that could very well be altered to achieve goals similar to that of SIA. Indeed, RBM and LFA were mentioned above as being good candidates for such an endeavour. 6.2 IMPLICATIONS The following section lays out the implications of CIDA establishing a distinct SIA-type mechanism to capture the social and cultural dimensions of the development projects it supports. This thesis has served to demonstrate that within CIDA some social and cultural factors are being considered; however, it is only with proper tools that the Agency will be able to capture these factors more holistically. 6.2.1 Implications of Study Results (for CIDA) 1. Logical Framework Analysis and Results Based Management as a Substitute for SIA CIDA could refine its LFA and RBM so as to allow for the integration of elements that would make these frameworks more similar to SIA in what they seek to achieve. CIDA could weave a component reflective of its people- and environment-oriented goals into its RBM and LFA policies and guidelines. Also, the RBM and LFA frameworks could be modelled to capture a) adverse effects, the related mitigation measures and residual effects, as well as b) the wide range of potential effects of projects. The advantage of this approach is that the Agency would be adapting a tool that it already makes good use of in its project development approach. Additionally, an adaptation of the RBM and LFA frameworks constitutes a more subtle change that both Agency Staff and project proponents would be unlikely to oppose or resist27. 2. An Integrated, Comprehensive Approach to Impact Assessment Approach One alternative could be that CIDA could focus on developing a more integrated and comprehensive type of impact assessment that would touch on all the required assessments. Instead of having individual requirements for EIA, SIA, and other types of impact assessment (political, environmental, etc.), the Agency could have a single, more general set of procedures that would touch on all these assessments. This would surely eliminate procedural redundancies and simplify bureaucratic processes. 3. Using Frameworks A framework such as the one in Chapter 3 has the potential of being a good practical tool to be used by both CIDA staff and project proponents. Such a framework could easily serve as a reference for the Agency staff to conduct or analyse social assessments. It could also serve as a set of guidelines for project proponents. The Agency could have simple frameworks — as many as the specific assessments it requires — to ensure that there is no mistake in what is actually expected in terms of project assessments. 2 7 As opposed to the likely (negative) reaction of both Agency staff and project proponents to the imposition of an all new set of requirements and tools. 72 4. Terms of Reference The Agency could actively participate with project proponents to set the terms of reference pertaining to the requirements for impact assessments and other necessary studies on a case by case basis. This could be done with a three-step project proposal process: 1) the preliminary project proposal, 2) the elaboration of the Terms of Reference, and 3) the second and final project proposal submission. In the preliminary stage, project proposals could be subjected to a screening process. . The outcome of this process could be that projects (by their nature) are deemed 'worthy' of CIDA's support. Once project proposals are deemed 'worthy', the Agency could proceed to contribute in the elaboration of the Terms of Reference of the actual project proposal. This way, there would be no mistaking what exactly the Agency expects from project proponents. Finally, in light of the Terms of Reference, the project proponents could submit final project proposals that would serve to determine whether or not the Agency should actually support them. 5. Clarification of Effects/Impacts In any kind of impact assessment, it is important that effects be clearly identified in terms of their occurrence in time and in terms of their nature. Consequently, effects should be identified as being short-, medium- and long-term, which is clearly recommended in the literature. When identifying effects, it is also necessary that specifications pertaining to their nature and the type be provided. For instance, instead of writing "The women will be affected", one could specify that "The women will have to travel longer distances to get water, thus reducing the time they allocate to other daily responsibilities or chores". According to the literature, effects should be clearly identified in impact assessment. How else will planners make provisions for potential effects if they are unaware of their nature? Clarifications pertaining to the identification of effects could be clearly stated and integrated to the Agency guidelines. This would contribute to make the Agency's requirements ascertainable. 6. Project Appraisal Procedures Common to the Different Branches This study has found that assessment procedures among CIDA three programming branches (Bilateral, Multilateral and Partnership) are fragmented. Indeed, all three branches seem to have different procedures for project appraisal. Also, the staff seems to only be familiar with what is being done in the branches where they work. There could be a common project appraisal "skeleton" that could apply to all of the Agency's programming branches. This would facilitate communication among the branches, simplify bureaucratic processes, limit the amount of 'specialised' staff needed, and make the dissemination of information much easier. 7. Qualified Personnel The Agency could regularly hold workshops on impact assessment, research methods, facilitation/mediation/negotiation, etc. to help shape its employees into more qualified professionals capable of undertaking impact assessments themselves, instead of sub-contracting these to outside agencies. This could also serve to ensure that the Agency staff keep up with the different techniques and methods being applied in the field. 73 8. Using Local Resources Indigenous knowledge is an important resource that assessors can tap into. Indeed, indigenous knowledge can provide assessors with pertinent information that touches on culture, patterns of life, traditions, etc. Additionally, CIDA could develop research and impact assessment training29 programs in the countries it collaborates30 with. This type of capacity-building would benefit both CIDA and the people being trained. Working with trained local workers and professionals instead of relying on outside consultants CIDA would reduce costs. Also, the training provided could increase the local people's awareness of the implications of CIDA projects in their lives. 6.2.2 Other Implications 9. The Canadian Social Assessment Act (CSAA) Some people claim that they forego SIA simply because there is no legal provision that dictates its undertaking as is the case with the CEAA for EIA. A distinct law dedicated solely to SIA could serve to a) legitimise the tool/process as was the case with the CEAA for EIA, b) provide the regulatory framework necessary to ensure that SIA studies/analyses are done, and c) provide guidelines that would facilitate the undertaking of SIAs. However, it is important to mention that problems may arise when applying sanctions, as social change is dynamic and hard to predict accurately. 10. The C E A A AS mentioned in Chapter 1, the social and cultural effects that are intended to be captured in EIA are only those that are directly related to changes brought about in the bio-physical environment. The CEAA could be revisited to refine its contents. It could be modified to either a) clearly state that these social and cultural effects are those that are caused or correlated to the change(s) or exploitation of the environment, or b) to include a wider range of social and cultural effects. 11. Creating an Impact Assessment Information Network A good way to make impact assessment more accessible to all could be to set up and co-ordinate a system of networks. A good example of such a network is the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA), the goals of which are to "advance the art of impact assessment in application from local to global" and to "develop international and local capability to anticipate, plan and manage the consequences of development to enhance the quality of life for all" (IAIA brochure). In addition to the IAIA, there could potentially be local, regional, national, and maybe even global databases made up of past impact assessments organised according to type (i.e., EIA, SIA, etc.) and theme (i.e., education, infrastructure, water, etc.) to facilitate impact assessment around the globe. Of course, databases of that breadth are not easy to set up, and would probably have to be built up over time. Efforts to build such a network could be focused at the micro or local level: each city works on establishing its own database based on its own experiences. Eventually, all of these sources of information could be linked to one another thus establishing regional impact assessment networks. Afterwards, regional networks could also be linked to constitute national networks, and so on... 2 8 Social/Gender Analysis (SGA). 2 9 Culturally aware training programs. 30 CIDA is trying to move away from the 'doing for the people' approach and closer to working alongside the recipient countries (collaborative approach). 74 6.3 F INAL COMMENTS CIDA works on an iterative basis: it has procedures and mechanisms that it puts into operation and reviews to see what adjustment or changes have to be made (this is one of the responsibilities of the Performance Review Branch). The Performance Review Branch could perform an evaluation of the CIDA's actual practices for taking into account the social and cultural dimensions of the development initiatives it supports. Such an appraisal would better help pinpoint the strengths and deficiencies of the Agency. The Performance Review Branch could then make recommendations to help guide the betterment of the CIDA's practices to take into account the social and cultural dimensions of development initiatives. Within the Agency, there is already widespread awareness that social and cultural factors, gender issues as well as participatory methods — all elements of SIA, although not exclusively — are crucial in order to have strong development practices. This is evident from the content of the Agency's procedural documents, and from the make-up of the tools, policies and strategies it uses to follow its mandate and achieve its goals. The formulation of distinct protocol for SIA may be hard for CIDA to implement in practice. However, there are possible alternatives that have been identified as having the potential of serving the same purpose as SIA. The Agency already has good practices and principles for assessing development projects. Al l that would need to be done would be to refine, synthesise and distil what the Agency already has to obtain top-of-the-line tools to holistically capture the many dimensions of development projects in the planning stages. This would contribute to improve the Agency's use of human and financial resources (efficiency), as well as to clarify the Agency's different requirements. Lastly, it is important to stress that these tools and procedures should not be reduced to bureaucratic procedures blindly applied. 75 7. BIBLIOGRAPHY Barrow, C. J. 1997. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment: An Introduction. London: Arnold Boothroyd, Peter. 1978. "Issues in Social Impact Assessment". Plan Canada, 18(2): 118-133 Burdge, Rabel J. 1990. "The Benefits of Social Impact Assessment in Third World Development". Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 10(1-2): 123-134 Burdge, Rabel J. 1987. "The Social Impact Assessment Model and the Planning Process". Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 7(2): 141-150 Burdge, Rabel J. 1983. " Community Needs Assessment and Techniques". In Social Impact Assessment Methods. Finsterbusch, K., L. G. Llewellyn and C. P. Wolf (eds.). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications Burdge, Rabel J., and Vanclay, Frank. 1995. "Social Impact Assessment". In Environmental and Social Impact Assessment. Frank Vanclay and Daniel A. Bronstein (eds). Chichester; New York: John Wiley & Son Burdge, Rabel J. and Robert A. Robertson. 1990. "Social Impact Assessment and the Public Involvement Process". Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 10(1-2): 81-90 CEARC. May 1985. Social Impact Assessment: A Research Prospectus CIDA, 1999a. Policy on Gender Equity. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1999b. Results-Based Management in CIDA: An Introduction Guide to the Concepts and Principles. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1998a. An Urbanizing World: Statement on Sustainable Cities. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1998b. CIDA and International Cooperation: Canada's Role in International Development. Hull: CIDA 76 CIDA. 1998c. Programme d'information sur le developpement: Lignes directrices regissant la presentation de propositions. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1998d. Cultural Dimensions of Sustainable Development: CIDA's Orientations and Initiatives. Hull: CIDA CIDA (Asia Branch, Americas Branch, and Africa and Middle East Branch). 1998e. Overview of the Bilateral Project Cycle. Draft. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1997a. Our Commitment to Sustainable Development: The Strategy of the Canadian International Development Agency. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1997b. Handbook on Environmental Assessment of Non-Governmental Organizations and Institutions Programs and Projects. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1997c. CIDA's Policy on Meeting Basic Human Needs. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1997d. The Logical Framework: Making it Results-Oriented: Guidelines. Prepared by the Performance Review Branch and the Bilateral Branches. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1997e. Programme de cooperation Internationale: Trousse d'information. Prepared by the Institutional Cooperation Division, Canadian Partnership Branch. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1997. Your guide to Working with CIDA. http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca CIDA. 1996a. Strategy for Health. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1996b. Environmental Assessment at the Canadian International Development Agency. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1996c. CIDA's Policy on Poverty Reduction, Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1996d. Guide du mecanisme de projets ONG. Prepared by the NGO Direction, Canadian Partnership Branch. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1996. Results-Based Management in CIDA - Policy Statement, http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca CIDA. 1992(Jan). CIDA's Policy for Environmental Sustainability. Hull: CIDA CIDA. 1987. Environment and Development: The Policy of the Canadian International Development Agency. Hull: CIDA CIDA. Undated. A Guide to CIDA 's Bilateral Responsive Mechanism (Unsolicited Proposals). http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca CIDA. Undated "Project Appraisal". In The Bilateral Project Cycle. Internal procedural document. Prepared by the Bilateral Branches. Hull: CIDA 77 CIDA. Undated. Effective Programming: Technical Notes. Internal document. Prepared by the Policy Branch. Hull: CIDA Coady International Institute. 1989. A Handbook for Social/Gender Analysis. Prepared for CIDA's Social and Human Resources Development Division. Hull Cochrane, Glynn. 1979. The Cultural Appraisal of Development Projects. New York: Praeger Publishers Connor, Desmond M. 1992. "A Community Approach to Social Impact Assessment". Reprinted in An Introduction to Socio-Economic Impact Assessment. Readings and Resources. Government of Yukon Department of Economic Development. 1997. Whitehorse: Government of Yukon Dale, Allan P., and Marcus B. Lane. 1994. "Strategic Perspectives Analysis: A Procedure for Participatory and Political Social Impact Assessment". Society and Natural Resources, 7(3): 253-267 Derman, William and Scott Whiteford. 1985. "Introduction: Issues in Social Impact Analysis and Development". In Social Impact Analysis and Development Planning in the Third World. Derman, William and Scott Whiteford (eds.). Boulder: Westview Press Gagnon, Christiane, Philip Hirsch, and Richard Howitt. 1993. "Can SIA Empower Communities?". Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 13(4): 229-253 Gutman, Pablo. 1997. "EIA of Urban Projects in Developing Countries: Challenge, Experience, Suggestions". Impact Assessment, 15(4): 377-406 Henry, Reg, 1990. "Implementing Social Impact Assessment in Developing Countries: A Comparative Approach to the Structural Problems". Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 10(1-2): 91-101 Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principle for Social Impact Assessment. 1995. "Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment". Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 15(1): 11-43 Ingersoll, Jasper. 1990a. "Introduction: Social Impact Assessment—For Richer and for Poorer". In Methods for Social Analysis in Developing Countries. Finsterbusch, Kurt, Jasper Ingersoll and Lynn Llewellyn (eds.). Boulder: Westview Press Ingersoll, Jasper. 1990b. "Social Analysis in AID and the World Bank". In Methods for Social Analysis in Developing Countries. Finsterbusch, Kurt, Jasper Ingersoll and Lynn Llewellyn (eds.). Boulder: Westview Press Jiggins, Janice. 1995. "Development Impact Assessment: Impact Assessment of Aid Projects in Nonwestern Countries". Impact Assessment, 13(1): 47-69 78 Krawetz, Natalia M . 1991. Social Impact Assessment: An Introductory Handbook. Environmental Management Development in Indonesia Project (EMDI), School for Pvesource & Environmental Studies. Jakarta; Halifax: Dalhousie University Mogan, E. Philip. 1985. "Social Analysis and the Dynamics of Advocacy in Development Assistance". In Social Impact Analysis and Development Planning in the Third World. Derman, William and Scott Whiteford (eds.). Boulder: Westview Press Moser, Caroline O. N . 1987. "Women, Human Settlements, and Housing: A Conceptual Framework for Analysis and Policy-Making". In Women, Human Settlements, and Housing. Moser, Caroline O. N. and Linda Peake (eds.). London; New York: Tavistock Publications OECD. 1992. Development Assistance Manual: DAC Principles for Effective Aid. Paris: OECD Ortolano, Leonard, and Shepherd, Anne. 1995. "Environmental Impact Assessment: Challenges and Opportunities". Impact Assessment, 13(1): 3-30 Pallen, Dean. 1996. Environmental Assessment Manual for Community Development Projects. Asia Branch. Hull: CIDA Pierre-Pierre, Valerie and Randy L. Cleveland. 1998. Sanitation in Third World Cities: A Planner's Introductory Handbook. Written for the course PLAN 548A, Infrastructure and the Urban Environment in the Third World. Vancouver: SCARP, UBC Rakowski, Cathy A. 1995. "Evaluating a Social Impact Assessment: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes in a Developing Country". Society and Natural Resources, 8(6): 525-540 Rickson, Roy E., John S. Western and Rabel J. Burdge. 1990. "Social Impact Assessment: Knowledge and Development". Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 10(1-2): 1-10 Rickson, Roy E., Rabel J. Burdge, Tor Hundloe, and Geoffrey T. McDonald. 1990. "Institutional Constraints to Adoption of Social Impact Assessment as a Decision-Making Tool". Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 10(1-2): 233-243 UBC Centre for Human Settlements and School of Community and Regional Planning,. and University of the Philippines School of Urban and Regional Planning. 1996. Social Impact Assessment (SIA) of the Marcopper Mine Tailing Spill in the Boac and Makulapnit River Valley, Marinduque Province, Philippines USAID. Undated. Social Soundness Analysis, http://www.info.usaid.gov/ftp_data/pub/ handbooks/ 200/ 2026s7.pdf Van Rooy, Alison. 1995. A Partial Promise? Canadian Support to Social Development in the South. Ottawa: The North-South Institute Wardrop Engineering Inc. 1995. Final Report Volume VII: Social Impact Assessment. Second Subic Bay Freeport Project. Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority. World Bank 79 Webler, Thomas, Hans Kastenholz and Ortwin Renn. 1995. "Public Participation in Impact Assessment: A Social Learning Perspective". Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 15(8): 443-463 Wolf, C. P. 1983. "Social Impact Assessment: A Methodological Overview". In Social Impact Assessment Methods. Finsterbusch, K., L. G. Llewellyn and C. P. Wolf (eds.). Beverly Hills Sage: Publications World Bank. 1997. Project Name Philippines-Second Subic Bay Freeport Project (@). http://www.worldbank.org/pics/pid/ph40981 .txt World Bank. 1996. "Social Assessment: Methods for Social Analysis" in The World Bank Participation Sourcebook, http://www.worldbank.org/html/edi/ sourcebook/sbal08.html 80 8. APPENDIX I (Interview Question Sample and Interview Results) The Use of Social Impact Assessment in the International Development Arena: A Case Study of the Canadian International Development Agency A. Bilateral Branch, Project Design and Project Proposals 1. What are the procedures and/or key elements for Bilateral project design, appraisal and approval? 2. What are the criteria for validating the appraisal of projects proposed to the Agency? 3. What are the methods used for validating the appraisal of projects proposed to the Agency? 4. What is the process used to validate the appraisal of projects proposed to the Agency? 5. What level of detail is required for the project proponent's appraisal analyses? 6. What guidelines are made available to the project proponents to help them in the undertaking of the required appraisal analyses/studies? B. CIDA Projects 7. What are the criteria for conducting the appraisal of projects within the Agency? 8. What are the methods used for the Agency to conduct SIA (or the equivalent)? 9. What is the process used by the Agency to conduct SIA (or the equivalent)? 10. What is the level of detail required for the Agency's appraisal analyses? C. CIDA and Social Impact Assessment (SIA) 11.1 understand that CIDA does not have an explicit protocol for SIA as do USAID, the ADB, and the World Bank, for example. Why do you think that is? Do you think the Agency should have one? 82 The Use of Social Impact Assessment in the International Development Arena: A Case Study of the Canadian International Development Agency 12. In your opinion, what is the closest tool (policy, protocol, guidelines, etc.) to SIA in the Agency? 13. In your opinion, is SIA a necessity for good project appraisal and design? Why? 14. How would you qualify the SIA component within EIA? Is it sufficient? D. Results-Based Management (RBM) and Logical Framework Analysis (LFA) 15. How does RBM link into SIA? What are the commonalities or overlaps between the two? Are they interchangeable? 16. How are social and cultural factors taken into account in RBM and in LFA? E. Other Questions 17. Have you ever used the Coady International Institute Handbook for Social/Gender Analysis? How useful is it? 18. What were the criteria for setting a threshold of $500,000 under which projects in the bilateral branch do not need to undergo the appraisal steps? Is there such a threshold in the other branches (multilateral and partnership)? 83 Informant 1 Manager Strategic Management Group Asia Branch CIDA E-Mail Communication Ms. Pierre-Pierre ... ***** ***** passed your message on to me. It raises a number of interesting questions and, of course these cross organizational and functional lines within the Agency. I will try and address them from a "bilateral" program perspective. Working from within CIDA's Asia Branch I have been responsible for the operational policy framework for program delivery in CIDA's "bilateral" programs (Asia, Africa and the Middle East and the Americas). This covers process and content for the operationalization of bilateral assistance and is distinct from the Agency's development policy framework which is managed by our Policy Branch. In terms of explicit protocols, it is important to remember that the environmental analysis is a mandatory requirement of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and is therefore required by legislation. A social impact assessment is not mandated by legislation but is an essential step in project development. In the bilateral programs there is a well defined project life cycle approach that is applied to all of our projects. It is defined by a number of "drivers" including the Government's foreign policy (Canada in the World) which sets out an overall framework for Canada's Official Development Assistance and defines the mandate of the ODA program: "... to support sustainable development in developing countries, in order to reduce poverty and to contribute to a more secure, equitable and prosperous world". Canada in the World also describes basic principles for effective programming. These have subsequently been updated in Our Commitment to Sustainable development. Briefly put these are (1) acquiring and using knowledge; (2) applying participatory approaches; (3) applying iterative approaches; (4) capacity development; (5) promoting program policy and coherence; (6) promoting donor coordination; and (7) demonstrating results. It is this latter point which provides the link to the adoption of results-based management in CIDA. RRBM requires us to be clear about objectives, realistic about expectations, methodical in the review of performance and flexible in making required changes. It is a philosophy and an approach to planning and implementation of projects which is being implemented in CIDA and which the Auditor General commented on in his most recent report to Parliament. I have copied this reply to **** ***** of our Performance Review Branch (PRB). PRB is the "custodian" of our RBM policy and provides cross agency leadership with respect to the application and refinement of RBM methodologies across the program branches. 84 Our prograrnming approach is also formed and shaped by our development policy framework. A number of Agency policy statements and papers provide a structured framework within which programming takes place. These include works on sustainable development, poverty reduction, basic human needs, women in development and gender equity, infrastructure services, human rights, good governance and democratization, private sector development, capacity development and environmental sustainability. More information is available on our web site or from our communications branch. Finally, the OECD/DAC document - Shaping the 21 s t Century: The Contribution of Development Cooperation provides a collective vision of the OECD/DAC members with respect to the future goals and directions of development cooperation. As you can see the ODA policy framework and the CIDA development policy base provide the context for the development of bilateral programs and projects, within which all bilateral programs and projects operate and against which all bilateral programs, projects and activities are reviewed and measured. This is the high level framework. There is also an Agency program management framework which is made up of our policy on results based management, the Agency accountability framework and the performance review framework. As well program and project operations must respect government legislation, policy and delegated authorities with respect to contracting, financial operations, approvals, etc. Additionally the Agency uses the logical framework approach as an integral planning tool. As this then sets the context and reaches the point where I can respond to the first question that you raise - Is results based management a substitute for, or better than, the social impact analysis? Definitely not. RBM is an essential part of the overall framework within which projects are designed, implemented and assessed. SIA is one of a number of analytical processes used in project design. Bilateral programming in a country or region takes place within a country policy framework -see our web site for some examples. These frameworks set the overall parameters and objectives for our programming in a country or region. Project ideas are first screened to ensure that they fit within this framework. We look broadly at the enabling environment (policy environment, and priorities, state of economic development, relationship of proposed project to country needs, ODA policy, etc.),; the target group (impact on social roles and differentiated needs of the population, differential impact of the project by gender and ways of reducing gender gaps, etc.); and a technical and capacity screening (appropriateness, capacity, etc.). Project ideas are then screened against the CIDA policy base, again to ensure a "fit". If the screening results are positive a decision would be taken to do further analytical work on the proposed project. The results of this work lead to a decision as to whether or not to fund the proposed project. The analytical work begins with project appraisal, followed by feasibility and design work. In the appraisal stage a number of analysis are undertaken as appropriate. Clearly the existence of previous analytical work can at times simplify this process. Generally speaking 85 the following analyses are carried out: (1) socio-economic and political analysis; (2) gender analysis; (3) capacity analysis; (4) environmental analysis; and (5) analysis of benefits to Canada and the recipient country. These analyses provide the basis for an informed decisions on the project rationale (need, target group, expected results, potential, for capacity development and gender equity, etc. feasibility, design and approval. I trust that this information will assist you and clarify some of the points that you are interested in. To give you some more detailed information I am mailing you a document called "Overview of the Bilateral Project Cycle" which should help provide some of the context, "The Logical Framework - Making it Results Oriented" and a chapter on project appraisal from an internal procedural document used by our staff. 86 Informant 2 Vice-President Canadian Partnership Branch CIDA E-Mail Communication Sorry to be so tardy in getting back to you but my agenda has been very heavily charged in the past week or so. As I am not an expert in your area of interest and am not often involved in the appraisal of projects, my responses to your questions will be fairly general. A. Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) 1. Have you ever used the Coady International Institute Handbook for Social/Gender Analysis? How useful is it? I am not familiar with the Coady International Institute Handbook for Social/Gender Analysis. B. CIDA and Social Impact Assessment (SIA) 2. I understand that CIDA does not have an explicit protocol for SIA as do USAID, the ADB, and the World Bank, for example. Why do you think that is? Should the Agency have one? I am not aware of a CIDA protocol for SIA. As I am unfamiliar with the content and purpose of such protocols, I cannot say why CIDA does not have one or assess whether CIDA should have one. 3. In your opinion, what is the closest tool (policy, protocol, guidelines, etc.) to SIA in the Agency? Assuming that the SIA is a tool for assessing the social implications of development projects, CIDA has several such tools including: policies covering all 6 of our program priorities as set out in "Canada in the World", Canada's foreign policy statement; strategies on cross-cutting issues such as gender and the environment; and a variety of operational policies and guidelines governing in many diverse programs, each with their own objectives, eligibilities, criteria and anticipated results. 4. In your opinion, is SIA a necessity for good project appraisal and design? Why? I do not know what precise meaning you are giving to "SIA". If you are referring to a requirement for assessing the developmental impacts of projects, I would say that it is critical to ensuring effective project selection. 87 5. How would you qualify the SIA component within EIA? Is it sufficient? I do not know what you mean by the acronym "EIA". C. Proposed Projects (CIDA-funded projects) 6. What are the criteria for validating the appraisal of projects proposed to the Agency? The criteria vary in accordance with the program under which a project is approved. You can get more information on our many programs by contacting CIDA's website. 7. What are the methods used for validating the appraisal of projects proposed to the Agency? 8. What is the process used to validate the appraisal of projects proposed to the Agency? 7. and 8. The methods and processes also vary by program and can include peer group assessment, selection committees, etc. 9. What level of detail is required for the project proponent's appraisal analyses? I do not know what you mean by "level of detail". 10. What guidelines are made available to the project proponents to help them in the undertaking of the required appraisal analyses/studies? Full information is available to project, proponents on all of our programs. Please visit our website. I regret that I cannot be more helpful, but your questions are framed in terminology which is not in general use in CIDA. Also, CIDA has many different funding windows which have been created for different purposes, making it extremely difficult to generalize. Finally, because of the nature of my work, I am not personally involved in the activities to which you refer. Again, I would encourage you to contact the experts in our Performance Review Branch. 88 Informant 3 Consultant working with CIDA Gender Audit In-Person Communication 1) There is a gender equity strategy requirement for all CIDA projects. What are the other requirements? Proposals submitted to CIDA fit into the Agency's overarching strategy. There three cross-cutting themes: 1) gender, 2) environment and 3) sustainability. Now, in CIDA's the three cross-cutting themes and at least one of its six development priorities are all linked to the Agency's policies 2) Are social and cultural factors taken into consideration or integrated in the LFA? Social and cultural factors should be integrated into the LFA. They are built in at the level of performance indicators. The LFA can be defined and redefined to capture these elements. There is a need for flexibility, because not all is quantifiable. The LFA must be an iterative process. 3) How does RBM link into SIA? What are the commonalities or overlaps? RBM and SIA should be linked. They are complementary (they feed into one another). A couple of suggestions for better linkages: a) spectrum of processes, and b) feedback loop. RBM tends or tended to be a quantitative tool. Recently, it has been trying to integrate/build in SIA. 4) In your opinion, is the SIA component of EIA sufficient? The SIA component of EIA is not sufficient by itself. It does not capture all social impacts, just those that are the result of change(s) brought to the bio-physical environment. 5) Does the LFA integrate negative outcomes? The LFA should integrate both positive and negative impacts to help better respond to then in the next steps of planning. The LFA should be a "living document" with is under on-going review. 6) What are CIDA's mechanisms for evaluating and approving proposals? Each call for proposals has an evaluation grid attached to it, which works on a point basis. Teams of CIDA staff go over the proposals, and if all requirements are met, then they select the lowest bidder. Points are deducted for every $100 over the lowest bid. 89 Ultimately, their choice is made according to price (and often the final choice is not necessarily the best). 90 Informant 4 Senior Advisor and Economist Policy and Strategic Planning Africa and Middle East Branch CIDA E-Mail Communication Dear Ms. Pierre-Pierre, Further to your message to Mr. ********; requesting his potential contribution to your research and thesis, I am pleased to offer you my assistance on these matters on his behalf. Regrettably, Mr. ********'s heavy program does not allow him the time to respond adequately to your needs. As you seek to learn more about CIDA's project appraisal and design procedures, please find r below a summary of some guidelines and procedures, which apply to the CIDA Geographic programs. Should you need more information, I would be pleased to help you identify the interlocutors in CIDA who could discuss these topics with you. Please note that the implementation of the guidelines must take into account the specific circumstances of the different projects and the resources available to conduct these analyses. You will see for instance that project appraisal involves a series of in-depth, project specific analyses that fall under the following five headings: a) Socio-economic and Political Analysis; b) Gender Analysis; c) Capacity Analysis; d) Environmental Analysis; and e) Analysis of the Benefits to Canada and the Recipient Country. a) Socio-economic and Political Analysis This analysis: reviews the social, economic and political context of the project; asks why the situation is as it is; and identifies how the proposed project can contribute to the development of the target population, area(s), institution(s) or to the solution of existing problems. As in all five analyses, this analysis should also indicate what the expected developmental benefits and results of the initiative are and what constraints and risks are likely to be faced. This analysis can be seen and undertaken as three distinct parts (social, economic and political) or as one interdisciplinary study of the development context of the project. The social aspect would cover the basic living conditions of the population (especially the target group); the social needs of the target group; the value' systems and influence of culture; the class system or other indications of rich and poor; social policies and current investments in social capital; the project's potential impact (positive and negative) on people living in poverty; the project's potential impact (positive and negative) on children; potential for local ownership and commitment; and the cultural "fit" of the project. The social analysis would assess interests 91 (positive and negative), needs of, benefits to, and relations among, the stakeholders and the optimum roles, influence, and expectations of the parties, as well as potential support or opposition (risk) to the proposed project. This can be determined through a standard stakeholder analysis. The economic aspect would review the country's macro-economic situation and economic contribution to the proposed sector(s) of involvement; the economic needs of the target group; the economic constraints to achieving the expected benefits; the costs/benefits comparison to determine the costs of implementing and operating the proposed project as compared to the benefits/results, and whether the costs are justified in comparison to the benefits that they are likely to generate. The political aspect would assess the political and decision making systems and structures at the national and local levels and their likely influence on (or risk to) the project; the state of democratic development and respect for human rights; divisions within the political framework by sex, land-ownership, wealth, etc.; political influence of women, ethnic groups, the poor, etc.; and the political climate and stability in the country. (Note that the information dealing with women would be taken from, or included in, the Gender Analysis described below.) Al l three "parts" of the analysis would identify the expected benefits and results of the project and the potential constraints and risks to the project as found in the LFA. The available tools that could facilitate the analysis include (but are not limited to): • a diagnostic survey to gain an understanding of the prevailing conditions in the region, country, communities and to assist in determining the needs of vulnerable groups; • a situational review to consider the barriers to reaching the target groups and the potential for leverage and cooperation; • a stakeholder analysis (which would also be useful for other analyses); • social assessment techniques including rapid appraisal and surveys using participatory approaches; and • the results of the Gender analysis (see below). b) Gender Analysis CIDA's Policy on Women in Development and Gender Equity is based on the principle that development interventions will only be effective if they serve the needs and interests of both women and men, girls and boys. CIDA's use of gender analysis reflects its recognition of the potential for projects to involve and affect males and females differently. This potential for differential impacts is a consequence of the different roles women and men often play in economic, social and political processes. These different roles usually result in women having less access than men to resources, benefits and power. 92 Gender Analysis is a tool which should be used as an integral part of the appraisal and design process. Gender equity considerations should also be included in the socio-economic and' political analysis, the capacity analysis, the development benefits analysis and in the subsequent feasibility process. A Country Gender Equity Profile, if it exists, can serve as a starting point from which a more detailed project level Gender Analysis can be carried out. Given that women and men are not homogenous groups, gender analysis can also provide information on other social variables such as class, race and ethnicity which may have important implications for a project. At the Project Appraisal stage, Gender Analysis focuses on the specific context of the project and identifies: ( • the differentiated needs and priorities of women and men, girls and boys; • opportunities to reduce gender gaps and promote gender equity; • measures to enable women to participate and benefit equally; • the capacity of partner government/civil society organizations to support gender equity both within their own decision making structures and through their programming; • specific results related to improving gender equity and gender-sensitive indicators for monitoring project performance; and • constraints and risks related to gender issues. Gender Analysis should be carried out by qualified professionals and with adequate resources to ensure relevance and accuracy. Branch Gender Specialists can assist in identifying information, developing TORs and assisting with the selection of consultants as required. Other sources of information also include CIDA field staff, local women's organizations, gender networks and other donors/organizations active on gender equity issues in the project area. Findings from the project Gender Analysis should be reflected in the project description and contribute to project design and the shaping of expected results. Gender-sensitive performance indicators should be included for all three levels of results in the LFA. The Summary of Findings for the Gender Analysis (which is appended to Annex C of the Project Approval Document) not only summarizes the key points of the Gender Analysis, but also indicates how this analysis has informed the design, expected results and indicators of the project. c) Capacity Analysis CIDA considers capacity development (CD) as a means to achieve sustainable development from its initiatives. This holistic perspective depends on the simultaneous improvement of an array of interdependent factors and institutions. CD integrates concepts such as institutional development, organizational change and human resource development. Capacity analysis provides an essential basis for promoting ownership and commitment and for the formulation of effective and efficient strategies for capacity development. 93 At the project level, capacity analysis refers to the process that identifies the strategic (transformational) change factors and operational (transactional) change factors that need to be addressed in the targeted institution(s) to effectively develop its/their capacity. The strategic change factors should consider: • the effects of external environment (risks) on achieving project results including the government's commitment to the development of the target institution(s), the political, administrative and legal interface of the institution(s) with the government and related institutions and the social/cultural milieu; • the mission and strategy, leadership and cultural environment of the institution(s); • the working environment within which the capacity development will take place, for example, the pool of human and financial resources available to the project; the labour market conditions (inflow and outflow of trained and experienced personnel, the working conditions, the standards and certification requirements); • the commitment and capacity to address gender equity as reflected in the policies, structures (including staffing), procedures, guidelines and resource allocations of the institution; • the likely sources of support for and opposition to change and development; and • other risks at the strategic level to embarking on a capacity development approach. The operational change factors to be considered include: • the orientation of the institution(s) towards accountability and producing results; • the perceived acceptance of change and Results-Based Management; • the organizational structure and culture of the institution(s) and constraints to structural changes; • the management systems and practices, decision making process, level of decentralization/centralization; • the planning process; • human resource and financial issues (potential for sustainability, self-reliance); • the likely sources of support for and opposition to change and development; • other international influences (such as other donor involvement); and • the risks to embarking on a capacity development project/approach. 94 A Capacity Analysis report outline might include: • the one page "Summary of Findings;" • the overall context; • the policy and institutional environment; • the network within which the organization(s) belong(s) (possibly a stakeholder analysis); • the specific institutional and organizational assessment; • the availability of human and financial resources and the potential for continuity of supply; • the potential to address gender equity issues (see also the Gender Analysis); • consideration of the capacity analysis in project design; • potential risks; and • relevant capacity development input into the draft LFA. There are a number of tools and related analyses available to assist in a capacity analysis and the staff or consultants undertaking the analysis should be familiar with their application. For example, SWOT analysis is a technique for looking at the Strengths (S), Weaknesses (W), Opportunities (O) and Threats (T) related to institutions. Further information can be obtained in the document, Capacity and Institutional Assessments: Frameworks, Methods and Tools for Analysis. d) Environmental Analysis Because there is a difference between an environmental analysis and an environmental assessment , Program/Project Managers (PMs) are urged to consult with an Environment Specialist for assistance before planning to undertake either an analysis or assessment. PMs should know what forms must be completed with respect to the CEAA, the types of projects which require an assessment or when an analysis is sufficient. Environmental Analysis examines the conditions of the bio-physical environment (water, soils, air, etc.) and the economic, social and institutional frameworks that influence the status and management of the environment. The objective of the analysis is to determine if adjustments have to be made to the project design to maximize its environmental benefits and thus to contribute to sustainable development. The Environmental Analysis, which can be undertaken as part of the process involving the other analyses, should: • establish an environmental profile of the territory affected by the project - the status of the environment, the problems, the potential impact of development initiatives, conditions for environmental management (enabling environment, legal, economic, institutional), the local capacity for solving environmental problems, the need for environmental education and/or awareness training, and any risks related to the environmental aspects of the project. (Often, this information is available in the national environmental action plan or national environmental strategy of the Recipient Country.); 95 • involve consultations with communities/areas that may be affected; • consider the relationship of the environmental profile to the project design and its potential effect on expected results - links between potential problems and project design, constraints and risks to project implementation, what steps need to be taken to resolve environmental issues, how the project will contribute to CIDA's commitment for environmental sustainability, how the project can support Canada's commitments to international environmental conventions, agreements and initiatives; • carry out the analysis using CIDA's guides and forms for this purpose (consult an Environment Specialist); and • indicate adjustments made to the project design and implementation plans to maximize environmental benefits. e) Analysis of the Benefits to Canada and the Recipient Country This analysis combines two important questions often asked about development assistance programs: what are the benefits to the recipients; and what are the benefits to Canada in doing the project? Benefits to the Recipient: An analysis of the developmental benefits to the Recipient Country, region, target group (as appropriate) should consider: • the benefits to and effects (positive and negative) of the project on the political environment, the country/region's developmental objectives and capabilities, the contribution to good governance, social policy, gender equity and government commitment to same; • the project's linkage with the country's macro-economic situation, its economic contribution to the sector(s), cross-sectoral, thematic or development issues which the project proposes to address and the economic constraints to achieving the expected benefits; • the project's potential contribution to the economic well-being and social conditions of the target population (men, women and children) including primary and secondary beneficiaries and the project's potential impact (positive and negative) on the poor; • the interests (positive and negative), needs of, benefits to, and relations among the stakeholders and the optimum roles, influence, expectations of the parties, as well as potential support or opposition to the proposed project. These can be determined through a standard stakeholder analysis (as mentioned in Chapter 6, but in more depth than for the screening process); • the increased capacity for self-reliance with a view to local ownership, commitment, a cultural "fit" and grass-roots development; 96 • a cost/benefit study to determine the cost of implementing and operating the proposed project as compared to the benefits/expected results, and whether the costs are justified in comparison with the benefits that they are likely to generate (see the economic portion of the Socio-economic and Political analysis); • the potential for leverage and cooperation with other government and donor initiatives; and • the constraints and risks that can affect the achievement of benefits/expected results. Benefits to Canada: Canada's ODA strategy includes projecting distinctively Canadian concerns and interests in international development.In addition to the specific developmental and policy factors (good governance, human rights, poverty alleviation, etc.), the strategy includes consideration of Canada's business and trade interests. Consultations with the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT), other Government departments (as appropriate) and CIDA specialists are essential for this part of the analysis. In closing, I hope that this information will be useful for your work and I wish you all the best in completing your thesis. 97 Informant 5 Performance Review Officer Performance Review Branch CIDA E-Mail Comminication A. Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) 1. Do all three branches (multilateral, bilateral and partnership) have the same' procedures/mechanisms for appraising projects? If not, what are the differences? No. Difference? I do not know (contact ********* *****, Performance Review Branch). 2. Have you ever used the Coady International Institute Handbook for Social/Gender Analysis! If so, how useful is it? Personally No. (contact **************; WID/GE, Policy) 3. What were the criteria for setting a threshold of $500,000 under which projects in the bilateral branch do not need to undergo the appraisal steps? Is there such a threshold in the other branches (multilateral and partnership)? not know c^ontcict *^ *^^ ^ j^^ ^ejjs t^jjt P_^ J_$/ ^ ^ * H 13rcinch/ '(''H'HH'H* ^ *K Partnership Branch/ ***** *****; Multilateral Branch). B. CIDA and Social Impact Assessment (SIA) 4. I understand that CIDA does not have an explicit protocol for SIA as do USAID, the ADB, and the World Bank, for example. Why do you think that is? Should the Agency have one? Do not know. Yes, I think CIDA should. Some aspect of SIA is covered by the CIDA Gender Assessment handbook (not sure if that is the exact title). 5. In your opinion, what is the closest tool (policy, protocol, guidelines, etc.) to SIA in the Agency? Basic Human Needs (BHN) Policy, WID/GE Policy, Poverty Reduction Policy, Sustainable Development Strategy, BHN: A Participatory Approach for Strategic Planning (guideline), Gender Assessment Handbook (?) (Sorry. I just moved my office and all my documents are still in the boxes!). 98 6. In your opinion, is SIA a necessity for good project appraisal and design? Why? Yes. Because it would remind the project appraisal and design that social impact consideration is "a must" in project design and appraisal. The project might achieve the expected result, but without SIA, it could have negative social impact. 7. How would you qualify the SIA component within environmental impact assessment (EIA)? Is it suffucient? So long as SIA is allowed to use its own framework and not through the economic paradigm, it is sufficient. C. Results-Based Management (RBM) and the Logical Framework Analysis (LFA) 8. How does RBM link into SIA? What are the commonalities or overlaps between the two? Are they interchangeable? 9. How are social and cultural factors taken into account in RBM? 10. Are project proponents meant to include negative results in the LFA? D. Proposed Projects (CIDA-funded projects) 11. What are the criteria for validating the appraisal of projects proposed to the Agency? 12. What are the methods used for validating the appraisal of projects proposed to the Agency? 13. What is the process used to validate the appraisal of projects proposed to the Agency? 14. What level of detail is required for the project proponent's appraisal analyses? 99 15. What guidelines are made available to help firms, institutions and other organisations in the undertaking of the required appraisal analyses/studies? E. CIDA Projects 16. What are the criteria for conducting the designing projects within the Agency? 17. What are the methods used by the Agency to conduct the appraisal of its own projects? 18. What is the process used by the Agency to conduct the appraisal of its own projects? 19. What is the level of detail required for the Agency's appraisal analyses? 100 Informant 6 Assistant Director Evaluation Division CIDA E-Mail Communication Dear Valerie Pierre-Pierre Your email note to******* *********** n a s b e e n s e n t to me for an initial response. I work in the Evaluation Division at CIDA, as a Senior evaluation manager. Our work in this Division focusses on corporate, horizontal, comprehensive reviews of CIDA's 6 programming priorities. I managed the Agency's review of Women-in-Development and Gender Equity, and am now in the midst of the review of our infrastructure investment. We recently completed a Review of Food Aid and Basic Human Needs. What we could offer to you from this Branch for your research us bot really a database of information. For each of our Reviews, we undertake evaluations of projects or programs, special studies of certain topics or related issues, and desk studies/analytical work on other aspects of that priority. The research questions we investigate for each priority are put forward by this Branch to our senior management committee, and approved by them. This would be the material we would offer to you. You seem to have (at least) 3 criterias: social impact assessment poverty reduction geographic focus on the Caribbean and Latin America So, if you would be interested in consulting the evaluation material we have; if you believe it would help you answer your research questions or hypothesis, please let me know. I could send you a complete list of studies and evaluations, though the number if projects evaluated in the Americas may be limited. One debate we might have, though, would center on your second paragraph in which you suggest that CIDA doesn't have a methodology or protocol for evaluating social impact. Since 1996, CIDA has in place what constitutes a methodological framework for monitoring and evaluation: this is called the Framework of Results and Key Success Factors. This is a two-page document (we recently held two workshops to discuss how it might be refined, and are working on an evaluation guide) which could be sent to you by fax or email. Depending on the purpose of the evaluation, evaluators will be trying impact (at the societal level) or outcome (at the project level). I also wondered about the three types of programmes or projects you list and about the source for that. CIDA dies all kinds of programming, including multilateral; through NGOs/NGIs; some is responsive, such as our program in Industrial Cooperation, with NGOs and in Central and Eastern Europe; we have a new responsive approach in bilateral; etc. Aren't there more than three kinds? 101 With regard to a database of information about approved and rejected projects, to my knowledge, CIDA doesn't function in such a way which would lead to the gathering of this kind of information. We maintain information on the projects we approve and implement. In any event, let us continue this discussion. If you like, I could telephone you at a convenient time to discuss some of this over the telephone. Let me know. Telephone conversation (main points) There is no database of rejected projects, only databases for projects supported by the Agency (see financial system for more information). Evaluations are more or less a 'backward' approach CIDA is concerned with impacts, but no specific impacts such as social impacts. Each branch has its own approval/appraisal unit. There is no overarching review committee at CIDA. There is no peer review between branches, maybe only within branches. 102 Informant 7 Gender Specialist Africa and Middle East Branch CIDA E-Mail Communication Hello, Valerie: As I am not in the office these days, I need clarification: what do you mean by the Coady International Social/Gender Analysis Manual? Could you please give the date, author, and full title? By any chance, are you talking about the document prepared by ***** ****** f o r u s e m CIDA gender training, inter alia? Or some other Coady publication — directed at whom? If you are trying to find out about "social impact assessment" at CIDA, there may be better ways of asking your question, including a definition of what you are including in the "social" part. Have you been in touch with **** ********? I am doing research on social impact assessment (SIA) in international development assistance agencies, and using CIDA as a case study. I can start by defining what I consider SIA to be. SIA is about forecasting the effects and impact of events, policies, programs and projects on people's physical and psychological health, well-being and welfare, traditions, lifestyles, institutions and interpersonal relationships (Ingersoll, 1990). I rely on this definition because it includes both effects on both the social and cultural environments. I have tried to establish whether or not the Agency has a distinct protocol for SIA. I found that there was no such thing at CIDA, but that the Agency's policies, strategies, procedures and requirements rely on some elements and principles that are typical of SIA. Consequently, although the Agency does not have a distinct protocol for SIA, it does take into consideration social and cultural factors. During the course of my research, I stumbled onto the manual I asked Ms. ********* about. The precise reference for it is the following: Coady International Institute. A handbook for Social/Gender Analysis. Social and Human Resources Development Division. CIDA. 1989 I found this reference in an internal document I got from CIDA last December. This document entitled "Effective Programming: Technical Notes", was prepared by the Policy Branch. The reason why I ask about the handbook is because I haven't seen it be referred to anywhere else at the Agency. The staff in the Partnership, Multilateral, Bilateral and Performance Review branches don't seem to know what it is. I am trying to find out if this handbook has been put to use within the Agency, as it contains much interesting and useful information about social and gender analysis. 103 I have not communicated with **** ********? but I have tried to communicate with staff from the Bilateral, Partnership, Multilateral, and Performance Review branches. Hello again, Valerie: I see that you are talking about the handbook produced for use in the CIDA "Social/Gender Analysis" training, in 1989. Perhaps one of the people I'm copying on this message knows more about this than I do, since I was overseas when that course and handbook were developed. I also don't have a copy of this document to look at now, while I am currently out of the office. As far as using it goes, I did at one point find certain pages useful on the gender side (sorry, I can't tell you which ~ I'm working here from memories of a few years ago). But overall, since those days, we have been through two evaluative processes on gender programming, plus the adoption of "results-based management". I think we have developed other training and guiding materials now that are more directly related to what our staff actually should do with regard to gender analysis. I can't comment on the "social impact" side of things because it is not my area of specialty or responsibility. My understanding of the development of the "Social/Gender Analysis" training & handbook is that CIDA wanted to have a follow-on gender training course after the initial Harvard-derived one, and this handbook was produced for use in this second course (2.5 days). When I returned from Jakarta in 1990 and became a Gender Specialist in Africa Branch, I took the course, and found it and the handbook lacking in several ways, i.e., the title and set-up of the course implied that gender was a sub-set of "social" issues, thereby taking away from its stand-alone category status and ignoring its cross-cutting relevance, particularly with reference to economic and political questions and wider policies. (Note: my Branch of CIDA has since done considerable work, including with other donors and NGOs, on gender in macro-economic policies and programming.) staff taking the course didn't seem to get much out of it that was relevant to gender in CIDA's kind of programming work. For example, one director told me he thought it helped him value targeting to particular social groups — with no reference to gender! some gender trainers who do considerable consultancy work in CIDA programming were dissatisfied with the course and manual as being not very geared to the work that CIDA staff actually perform. Sometimes, the course was "adapted" by these trainers to make it more relevant to the participants. This is because: ~ CIDA does not directly implement projects, but rather "manages" projects carried out by others (including NGOs); thus, the handbook was probably more useful for those NGO partners and contracted "executing agencies" of CIDA actually working with partner organizations "on site" overseas, especially on community development. — the handbook concerns itself considerably with "community development", while CIDA's activities on gender (and broader social issues too) are much more wide-ranging than this, e.g., CIDA also does high-level policy dialogue, and works on institutional capacity development. 104 So -- I think that, after the first evaluation on then-WID programming (1993), CIDA began to develop a replacement gender training course, which has had to take account of "results-based management". Similarly, "participatory development" has also gained ground in the whole development field, and "iterative" planning processes have also become more acceptable in CIDA projects. Thus, I am not surprised that few CIDA staff know of the Coady handbook, because I for one have preferred to use other guiding materials on the gender side. For example, for my purposes, focussing on gender, the gender training manual "Two Halves Make a Whole" — produced at a similar time by CCIC and MATCH, mainly for Canadian NGO use — seemed then more accessible and relevant overall than the Coady document. Meanwhile, within CIDA, in addition to formal policy statements and documents (such as the "Bilateral Handbook"), there are loose "networks" of staff interested in particular issues who meet (e.g. over bag lunches, informally) and use E-mail to share new information and expertise on things like participatory development, etc. 105 Informant 8 Director Strategic Planning CIDA Telephone Communication A. Partnership Branch, Project Design and Project Appraisal 1. Do all three branches (bilateral, multilateral, and partnership) rely on the same policies and statements in relation to project design, appraisal and approval? If not, what are the differences? No. The Bilateral Branch, in fact, covers 3 operational branches: Africa, Asia and the Americas. These branches have more similar procedures in terms of project design, appraisal and approval. The Multilateral and the Partnership programs are different in their nature. We fund long-term partnerships. We receive proposals from NGOs, for example, to renew our financial support to their projects and programs. The planning and approval processes (there us no project design in this branch) are generally different from that of the Bilateral Branch. There are 3 big programs within the Partnership Branch: 1) the NGO program, 2) the Educational Institutions (covering, among other things, colleges and universities), and 3) the Program of Industrial Cooperation (PIC). In the NGO program, the staff examines proposals. A committee analyses the proposals based on some pre-set criteria, and determines whether or not changes are necessary. Then, recommendations are made to the Minister who decides to support or not the projects. In the College and Universities program, there is approval at two levels depending on the amount of money required and the nature of the proposal: 1) the project level, and 2) the program level. Again, a committee analyses the proposals against a set of criteria. Then, depending on the nature of the project and the amount requested, the vice-president of the program or the Minister makes a decision about whether or not to fund the proposals. In the PIC, the focus is on developing joint ventures between Canadian firms and developing country firms. Proposals are looked at on a project basis. They are analysed, reviewed and then approved or rejected. This process is similar to that of the Bilateral Branch. 2. What are the procedures and/or key elements for Partnership project design, appraisal and approval? There is a set of criteria included as appropriate. All proposals are subject to the CEAA. Due consideration is given to gender. The process is different from that of the Bilateral Branch. In cases of programs with partners such as OXFAM that works in twenty or thirty countries, local political assessments are not dealt with in much depth in their proposals as they have long-term relationships with these countries. The political assessment of each country would not be as detailed as that of an organisation or firm presenting a proposal for a project or program in a single country. There is not too much focus on the local political assessment, but much more on 106 assessing the needs they are responding to. Agencies such as OXFAM are aware of the situation and the needs of the countries with which they work, and we trust in their knowledge of these countries. Of course, we do some monitoring and auditing to make sure that the money goes where it is supposed to go, and to make sure that there are results. Our NGO partners are involved in developing civil society, and like to engage average Canadians in issues of relevance. For example, the Red Cross raises funds, and advertises and develops the consciousness of people who give money. In that sense these partners assume an advocacy role to achieve their own objectives. We support what is good developmental work. We link up with NGOs that are interested in doing work in developing countries and support their programs and projects. The criteria the committees use probably vary slightly between programs within the Branch. I don't have the criteria on me now, but some examples of criteria are: Financial viability Past successes Reputation Quality and relevance of program/project Quality of staff B. CIDA and Social Impact Assessment (SIA) 3. I understand that CIDA does not have an explicit protocol for SIA as do USAID, the ADB, and the World Bank, for example. Why do you think that is? Should the Agency have one? Everything we do ultimately has an impact on people's lives in the countries where we work. It's kind of implicit; the Agency's six ODA priorities all that: we work with the people. Our six ODA priorities are our commitment to the Canadian stakeholders. We are also committed to the DAC poverty alleviation strategy. Ninety-five percent of our work falls into that policy framework. We're a very bureaucratic institution. Maybe it wouldn't add to the quality of what we do. We already have a whole bunch of policies that we refer to. An SIA would maybe be yet another bureaucratic requirement. We already impose a lot of analyses On people. We have to think of what would be the added value of imposing SIA. If it fills a gap that's fine; but if we're already doing it, then why impose yet another checklist? 4. In your opinion, what is the closest tool (policy, protocol, guidelines, etc.) to SIA in the Agency? Gender analysis and the Country Region Programming Framework (C/RPF). 5. In your opinion, is SIA a necessity for good project appraisal and design? Why? It's probably something that would be desirable to ensure that there is some thinking going on about all the potential implications of what they're (the firms, organisations and corporations) doing. 107 RBM and the LFA serve to make sure that we're covering all traditional aspects and impacts. 6. How would you qualify the SIA component within EIA? Is it sufficient? I don't know enough about it to answer you. C. Results-Based Management (RBM) 7. How does RBM link into SIA? What are the commonalities or overlaps between the two? Are they interchangeable? RBM was introduced to reinforce management practices. It focuses on better management and not necessarily on SIA. RBM dos require that you determine who are the beneficiaries, who will be affected, but not necessarily in what way. RBM articulates a chain of causal relationships. This can be seen as an SIA, but it's not just that. It's also political, economic, etc. 8. How are social and cultural factors taken into account in RBM? When designing an activity or a program, we have to determine the best way to get the desired results. It is necessary to check risks, and make an assessment of the situation in the target country to see how it is necessary to approach and work with indigenous peoples to achieve the expected outputs, outcomes and impacts. 9. Are project proponents meant to include negative results in the LFA? When they report, they're asked to report unintended effects. RBM and the LFA do not explicitly ask for negative outcomes. They could, I guess. They're already complaining that we're asking for too much...We're trying to reduce the bureaucracy. The focus us on the positive. D. Other Questions 10. Have you ever used the Coady International Institute Handbook for Social/Gender Analysis! How useful is it? The Coady International Institute is one of our partners. I can't really say that I'm familiar with the content of this manual. 108 11. What were the criteria for setting a threshold of $500,000 under which projects in the bilateral branch do not need to undergo the appraisal steps? Is there such a threshold in the other branches (multilateral and partnership)? It's a question of increased risk. The more money CIDA puts in, the more risks. The vast majority of funding in the Bilateral Branch is over that threshold, except maybe in the Central and Eastern Europe program. We have project facility mechanisms that lower project dollar value. Al l proposals are subject to committee analysis. This may vary from one project to another, but it is still done. There is no threshold within the Partnership Branch. The threshold is determined in what the director has authority to sign, in what the vice-president has authority to sign, or in what the Minister approves. The Minister approves what partners receive on an annual basis. 109 Informant 9 Sr. Policy Analyst Strategic Planning and Policy Division CIDA E-Mail Communication Py^g H* 'fc 'fc My name is Valerie Pierre-Pierre, and I am a Student at the University of British Columbia (UBC) where I am doing a Master of Science in Planning (MScP) at the School of Community and Regional Planning (SCARP). At the present time, I am working on my thesis, the focus of which is on the use of social impact assessment (SIA) at CIDA. I am communicating with **-***** *** who has agreed to be a key informant for my research. She responded to my questions to the best of her ability, and referred me to some of her co-workers for the questions she could not answer. Consequently, I am contacting you to ask you the following question: What were the criteria for setting a threshold of $500,000 under which projects in the bilateral branch do not need to undergo the appraisal (project analysis) steps? Is there such a threshold in the other branches (multilateral and partnership)? The purpose of my question(s) is to gather as much additional information as possible. Your contribution would be of great help to me and my research. Merci You know, I do not know where you got that idea about the trigger for doing a social impact. It has been a while since I have been in projects.... but it would seem to me that this would be a guideline only. In the "roadmap"? Frankly, something under that in the bilateral programme might be seen to be too much percentage of the total being spent in the "getting ready". Also, under $500k we can move pretty fast with projects because of levels of approval, and thus it is desirable to keep all the processes as "fast track" as possible. The Country Programme Reviews, of course are to have done social analysis so if the project is within the confines of the CPR we tend to feel it is already "in the Ballpark" of the right social targeting etc. I am not saying all this is right.... it is just the practical balancing act we are always in between moving forward and being sure every kind of analysis is done, (social is just one... there are many many others). If every analysis possible was done on every project... little would get done. However, there are requirements of the implementers of projects, once approved, to do all sorts of analysis in the inception stage, i.e. still before the project gets going. Issues are picked up there.' Hope this helps. It is a quick and top-of-brain answer to your interesting question. 110 9. APPENDIX II (Examples of Social and Cultural Variables/Factors) 111 APPENDIX II-A Asian Development Bank (ADB) Socio-Economic Profile A. Location and physical characteristics • Maps (showing roads, land use, bridges, major settlement areas) • Description of location B. Economic • Ownership of assets (land & non land) • Type of livelihood • Household income/expenditure • Skills • Employment & allocation of labour • Use & access to credit • Use & access to marketing services • Use & access to commercial inputs C. Social infrastructure • Access to health services • Education • Water & sanitation • Housing • Roads & communications • Energy D. Demographic • Age/sex/family size • birth/death rates • Health & nutrition • Migration • Number of single parent households • Gender differentiation of households E. Social organisation • Family structures • Social structures in the community • information about how collective decisions are made • Local institutional structure • NGOs in the community • Level of social respect & initiative 112 APPENDIX II-B Burge's Proposed List of Twenty-Six SIA Variables Category Variables Population Impacts • population change • influx or outflux of temporary workers • presence of seasonal (leisure) residents • relocation of individuals and families • dissimilarity in age, gender, racial or ethnic composition Community /Institutional Arrangements • formation of attitudes toward the project • interest group activity • alteration in size and structure of local government • presence of planning and zoning activity • industrial diversification • enhanced economic inequities • change in employment equity of minority groups • change in occupational opportunities Conflicts Between Local Residents and Newcomers • presence of an outside agency • introduction of new social classes • change in commercial/industrial focus of the community • presence of weekend residents (recreational) Individual and Family Level Impacts • disruption in daily living and movement patterns • dissimilarity in religious practices • alteration in family structure • disruption in social networks • perceptions of public health and safety • change in leisure opportunities Community Infrastructure Needs • change in community infrastructure • land acquisition and disposal • effects on known cultural, historical, and archeological resources Source: Burdge, 1987: 147 113 APPENDIX II-C Social and Cultural Factors Category Variables Identification of groups Identification and location of social groups Disaggregated data Social organisation Property holdings Work associations Production and distribution of goods and services Tribal structure/traditional lineage (social patterns) Belief systems Relationship between sexes Attitudes toward modernisation Attitudes toward reproductive behaviours Attitudes toward health and food Wealth forms Types of wealth people are trying to accumulate and their functions Patterns of mobility Establishing patterns of movement for potential project participants Access to basic human needs Analytical description of the poorest with an assessment of the causes of extreme poverty Location Availability of income-earning opportunities Food and shelter Services for education and health care Source: Cochrane: 1979, 21-38 APPENDIX II-D Cultural and Social Mapping Information Identification and location of different social groups Social organisation - property holdings - work associations - production and distribution of goods and services - tribal structure and traditional lineage Belief systems - relationship between sexes - attitudes toward modernisation - attitudes toward reproductive behaviour - attitudes toward health and food Wealth forms Patterns of mobility Access to basic human needs - description of the poorest and assessment of the causes of extreme poverty - location - availability of income-earning opportunities - food, shelter and infrastructure - services for education and health care Source: Cochrane, 1979: 21-38 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0088989/manifest

Comment

Related Items