- •Sustainability Assessment
- •Sustainability Assessment
- •Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier
- •First published 2013
- •Notices
- •British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
- •A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
- •Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
- •A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress
- •For information on all Academic Press publications visit our website at store.elsevier.com
- •List of Abbreviations
- •1 Sustainability Assessment of Policy
- •1.1 Introduction
- •1.2 Rationale
- •1.3 Understanding Discourses
- •2 Sustainability Climate of Policy
- •2.1 Introduction
- •2.2 Emergence of Policy Sustainability
- •2.2.1 Population and Resource
- •2.2.2 Modernity and Sustainability
- •2.3 Concept of Sustainability
- •2.3.1 Steady-State Economy
- •2.3.2 Carrying Capacity
- •2.3.3 Ecospace
- •2.3.4 Ecological Footprints
- •2.3.5 Natural Resource Accounting/Green Gross Domestic Product
- •2.3.6 Ecoefficiency
- •2.4 Sustainability Initiative
- •3 Characterizing Sustainability Assessment
- •3.1 Introduction
- •3.2 Resource System
- •3.3 Social System
- •3.4 Global System
- •3.5 Target Achievement
- •3.5.1 Detection of Changes
- •3.5.2 Determining Operation Scale
- •3.5.3 Harmonizing Operation Sequence
- •3.6 Accommodating Tradition and Culture
- •3.7 Selection of Instrument
- •3.8 Integration of Decision System
- •3.9 Responding to International Cooperation
- •4 Considerations of Sustainability Assessment
- •4.1 Introduction
- •4.2 Socioeconomic Consideration
- •4.2.1 Nature of Poverty
- •4.2.2 Nature of Resource Availability
- •4.2.3 Nature of Economy
- •4.2.4 Nature of Capital
- •4.2.5 Nature of Institutions
- •4.3 Consideration of System Peculiarities
- •4.3.1 Temporal Scale
- •4.3.2 Spatial Scale
- •4.3.3 Connectivity and Complexity
- •4.3.4 Accumulation
- •4.3.5 Nonmarketability
- •4.3.6 Moral and Ethical Considerations
- •4.4 Consideration of Component Peculiarities
- •5 Issues of Sustainability Assessment
- •5.1 Introduction
- •5.2 Issues Related to Society
- •5.2.1 Social Modernization
- •5.2.2 Societal Relationship
- •5.2.3 Radicalization and Convergence
- •5.2.4 Boserupian/Neo-Malthusian Issues
- •5.2.5 Social Ignorance
- •5.2.6 Social Attitudes
- •5.3 Issues Related to Policy Discourse
- •5.3.1 Discourses of Story Line
- •5.3.2 Discourses of Disjunction Maker
- •5.3.3 Discourses of Symbolic Politics
- •5.3.4 Discourses of Sensor Component
- •5.4 Issues Related to Actors
- •5.4.1 Influences of Macroactors
- •5.4.2 Positioning of Actors
- •5.4.3 Way of Arguing
- •5.5 Black Boxing
- •6 Components of Sustainability Assessment
- •6.1 Introduction
- •6.2 Social Adequacy
- •6.3 Scientific Adequacy
- •6.4 Status Quo
- •6.5 Policy Process
- •6.6 Policy Stimulus
- •6.7 Participation
- •6.8 Sectoral Growth
- •6.9 Resource Exploitation
- •6.10 Traditional Practices
- •6.11 Role of Actors
- •6.12 Framework Assessment
- •6.13 Scope Evaluation
- •6.14 Evaluation of Implementation
- •6.15 Instrument Evaluation
- •6.16 Structural Evaluation
- •6.17 Cause Evaluation
- •6.18 Cost Evaluation
- •6.19 Impact Assessment
- •6.20 Quantitative Approach
- •6.21 Anthropogenic Evaluation
- •6.22 Influence of Other Policies
- •7 Linkages of Sustainability Assessment
- •7.1 Introduction
- •7.2 Parallel Linkage
- •7.3 Linkage of Ascendancy
- •7.4 Linkage of Descendancy
- •7.5 Linkage of Hierarchy
- •7.6 Horizontal Linkage
- •7.7 Quasi-political Linkages
- •7.8 External Linkage
- •7.9 Market Linkage
- •7.10 Evaluation of Link to the Past
- •7.11 Actors and Story Line
- •7.12 Practices and Story Line
- •7.13 Reflection of Image of Change
- •7.14 Integrating Information
- •7.15 Forecasting
- •7.16 Assessing Options
- •7.17 Post-decision Assessment
- •8 Assessment of Policy Instruments
- •8.1 Introduction
- •8.2 Approaches of Implementation
- •8.3 Attributes of Instrument
- •8.4 Choice of Instruments
- •8.5 Instruments as a Component of Policy Design
- •8.6 Addressing the Implementation of Instruments
- •9 Social Perspectives of Sustainability
- •9.1 Introduction
- •9.2 Participation Evaluation
- •9.3 Process Evaluation
- •9.4 Retrospective Policy Evaluation
- •9.5 Evaluation of Policy Focus
- •9.6 Deductive Policy Evaluation
- •9.7 Comparative Modeling
- •9.8 Deductive Modeling
- •9.9 Optimizing Perspectives
- •9.10 Political Perspectives
- •10 Factors of Sustainability Assessment
- •10.1 Introduction
- •10.2 Actor as Policy Factor
- •10.3 Global Resource Factor
- •10.4 Local Resource Factors
- •10.5 Participation Factor
- •10.6 Participation Catalyst
- •10.7 Economic Factors
- •10.7.1 Influence of Macroeconomic Factors
- •10.7.2 Influence of Microeconomic Factors
- •10.7.3 Influence of Private Investment
- •10.7.4 Influence of Public Investment
- •10.7.5 Influence of Economic Incentives
- •10.8 Administrative Factor
- •10.8.1 Right and Tenure
- •10.8.2 Decentralization
- •10.8.3 Accessibility
- •10.9 Market Influence
- •10.10 Historical Factor
- •10.11 Other Factors
- •11 Tools for Sustainability Assessment
- •11.1 Introduction
- •11.2 Indicators for Evaluating Resource Dimension
- •11.2.1 SOR Indicators
- •11.2.2 NFR Indicators
- •11.2.3 Effectiveness Indicators
- •11.2.4 Comparing Indicators of Resources
- •11.2.5 Explanatory Variables
- •11.2.6 Tools for Assessing Human Dimension
- •12 Problems in Sustainability Assessment
- •12.1 Introduction
- •12.2 Boundary Problem
- •12.3 Problem with Social Concern
- •12.4 Role of Science
- •12.5 Institutional Difficulty
- •12.6 Implementation Problem
- •12.6.1 Circumstances External to the Implementing Agency
- •12.6.2 Inadequacy of Time, Resources, and Programs
- •12.6.3 Lack of Understanding Between Cause and Effect
- •12.6.4 Minimum Dependency Relationship of Decisions
- •12.6.5 Lack of Understanding of, and Agreement on, Objectives
- •12.6.6 Policy Tasks not Specified in Correct Sequence
- •12.6.7 Lack of Perfect Communication and Coordination
- •12.6.8 Rare Perfect Compliance of Implementing Body
- •13 Discussion and Recommendation
- •13.1 Discussion
- •13.2 Recommendation
- •13.3 Importance
- •Summary
- •References
CHAPTER 7
Linkages of Sustainability Assessment
7.1INTRODUCTION
7.2PARALLEL LINKAGE
7.3LINKAGE OF ASCENDANCY
7.4LINKAGE OF DESCENDANCY
7.5LINKAGE OF HIERARCHY
7.6HORIZONTAL LINKAGE
7.7QUASI-POLITICAL LINKAGES
7.8EXTERNAL LINKAGE
7.9MARKET LINKAGE
7.10EVALUATION OF LINK TO THE PAST
7.11ACTORS AND STORY LINE
7.12PRACTICES AND STORY LINE
7.13REFLECTION OF IMAGE OF CHANGE
7.14INTEGRATING INFORMATION
7.15FORECASTING
7.16ASSESSING OPTIONS
7.17POST-DECISION ASSESSMENT
7.1INTRODUCTION
Linkage evaluation identifies the relationship between different policies or different decisions of the same policy. For example, decisions in government functional system can be tripartite: executive, legislative, and judicial. All the three functional systems are involved with the cumulative and distributive issues that are associated to policies, therefore, have strong roles for sustainability. Evaluation of such linkages is important to investigate the dominance of one policy component over the other. Often a policy decision taken from outside the policy area may be detrimental for the resource and environmental sustenance.
Sustainability Assessment. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407196-4.00007-6
© 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
90 Sustainability Assessment
For example, decision on land use in agricultural policy may be detrimental to forest land use. Daniere and Takahashi (1997) indicated that where urbanization or urban migration is high, environmental policy might be hampered due to government attention to other policies linked to maintain the problem of migration and arrangement of urban amenities. Fiscal policies, exchange rates, terms of concession of public land, price controls, transport networks, land and tree tenure, tariff and nontariff barriers to international trade, investment incentives, agricultural sector’s strategies, and other macroeconomic policies may affect economic motivation in the management and conservation of forests. Therefore, the influences of the cross-sectoral linkages, linkages among cultural values, attitudes, and behavior are important to the design and implementation of sustainability aspects of a policy. However, consideration of the strength and nature of linkages are also important for deciding the justifiable level of investment and admirable effort of sustainability assessment. Bamberger (1991) has described sectoral policy areas, specific types of instruments influencing the policies, linkages affecting forestry, possible effects on forest development, and option for actions. Depending on the aspect and strength, the following linkages of forest land use practice with other policies/sectors may be considered for evaluation.
7.2 PARALLEL LINKAGE
Parallel linkages show how resource sectors are directly related to other sectors, e.g., environment and forest land use, tourism and forest land use. Such linkages are also known as sectoral linkage. Parallel linkages generally involve sectors related to a single frame— here it is land use. For example, tourism and forest production may be developed on the same frame of land. Assessment of such linkages gives equivalent emphasis of the sectors and may include aspects of common usage, economic output, and interdependent relationships.
7.3 LINKAGE OF ASCENDANCY
This linkage involves the evaluation of policy issues, which are not related to the same frame. This sort of linkage is more common in policies that influence the frame. This means, instead of considering a common frame, one of the policies considered in linkage analysis could
Linkages of Sustainability Assessment |
91 |
be a frame policy itself. For example, land use and tenure. If the linkage of forest resource is considered with land tenure policy (not land use policy), then the relationship will be a linkage of ascendancy. This is also called tenurial linkage. In those cases, decisions may need to be made on a priority basis. The common denominator of almost all resource-base policies is the land resource; as a result, land tenurial aspects overlap. This means the tenure may be considered as a frame policy. For example, oil exploration, coal mining, or agriculture within the forest area produce land tenurial conflict. Those conflicts need to be addressed in the analysis of land use whether the conditions for use of land for one aspect could ensure the conservation or reestablishment of other aspects as well.
7.4 LINKAGE OF DESCENDANCY
Linkage of descendancy mainly developed when requirements of one policy imposed and influenced the decision of other policies unrelated to the frame. For example, in forestry cases, they might happen from the competitiveness of the investment in the forestry sector resulting from the variation of economic efficiencies set out in the policies or changing in the value of currencies. Thus, the linkage may be named as economic linkage as well. As an example, deMontalembert (1995) indicated that the actual rent received by the Filipino government during 1979 1982 from the forest was much lower than the potential rent. As a result, to accrue the targeted revenue, more forest than the expected area was felled. Thus, economic incompetence of policy implementation descended down to extent (area) of forest land, use affecting sustainability.
7.5 LINKAGE OF HIERARCHY
Linkage of hierarchy connotes the linkages between the administrative bodies of organizations under the same policies or different policies. This may also be termed as administrative linkage. For example, in Bangladesh, a forest intruder, if caught, is handed over to the police and thereby an efficient control of illegal activities within the forest requires help and cooperation from the police department. This is not a policy linkage between two policies as such but a linkage between two administrative bodies that ensures the success and sustainability of forest policy.
92 Sustainability Assessment
7.6 HORIZONTAL LINKAGE
Horizontal linkages between institutions strengthen policy measures. They are different from the hierarchic in the sense that the requirements of such linkages do not have immediate effect and there may be an alternative (e.g., alternative institutes) to choose for establishing linkages. They are also not parallel, because they are not linkages for the same frame used by a different sector, but linkage of a different institution may be from a different or same sector. It may also be termed as institutional linkage. Sometimes, weaker attention to such linkage may cause a setback in the implementation of policies. For example, an institution preparing professionals for forestry management and administration needs to be emphasized equally within the Forest Policy arena, otherwise a fatal flow in implementation may develop due to lack of manpower hampering the total achievement of a good policy. Regional organization and treaties like EU, SAARC, ASEAN within the global arena and the individual countries within the regional treaties are examples of horizontal linkages. According to De Bruijn and Norberg-Bhom (2004), policy sustainability often depends on strength of bonds among the countries of such regional organizations.
7.7 QUASI-POLITICAL LINKAGES
Linkages of policy with affairs like transmigration, subsidization, aborigine issues, stakeholders, and international pressure is neither fully economical nor substantially political but a balance between the two. They cannot be considered under horizontal linkage because they are not regular policies but political. Formation and formulation of such policies are different than regular policies. Occurrence and recurrence of green politics in developed countries demonstrate coevolution of policies with sustainability. Even the liberal and democratic policies though have different commitments, nowadays they essentially keep an environmental component in their policies to demonstrate sustainability concern. Quasi-political linkages often provide disguised and multidimensional roles in affecting policy sustainability.
7.8 EXTERNAL LINKAGE
In developing countries, resource policy is predominantly targeted to economic development; therefore, it is expected that resource policy