Social Well-Being, Cohesion and Human Health
-
Upload
analiese-nicholas -
Category
Documents
-
view
47 -
download
5
description
Transcript of Social Well-Being, Cohesion and Human Health
Social Well-Being, Cohesion and Human Health
Ron McQuaid & Ariel BergmannEmployment Research Institute
Napier UniversityEdinburgh
Presented Bordeaux, 2008
Sustainable Development
• Three Pillars of Sustainability– Environmental – Economic– Social
Economic Sustainability
– Reasonably well developed, but still very general and not exact:
e.g.
Cost Benefit Analysis
Project Appraisal
Private v Social costs, discount rates, etc.
Concerned partly with economic growth
Social Sustainability• No agreed definition: a society that has social
justice, is persistent and thrives …..• “Development (and/or growth) that is compatible
with harmonious evolution of civil society, fostering an environment conductive to the compatible cohabitation of culturally and socially diverse groups while at the same time encouraging social integration, with improvements in the quality of life for all segments of the population.”
Polese and Stren (2000, 15-16)
Social Sustainability• It includes (economic, social and
environment dimensions): – Quality of life issues– Equality and social justice – Fair distribution of benefits and costs– Access to social resources to allow them to
participate fully in society – Individuals have opportunity to reach full
potential and overcome disadvantage– Promotes diversity while being inclusive
Social Sustainability (cont.)
– Multi-generational timescale– Primarily implemented and measured at the
local community level – Importantly it is multi-dimensional (difficult/
impossible to get a single measure such as monetarisation measure)
– SIA is not just the inclusion of the social impacts of environmental policies
The sources of unsustainable development are not always the result of greed, ignorance or irrational choices.
Rather, they may be the result of unintentional accumulation of rational, well-intended decisions made by people who are operating within societies whose political and economic systems make it difficult to act in ways that are responsible to all those affected in the present and in the future.
European Union Policy Background
• The Lisbon Strategy (introduces social dimension, especially as related to work)
• Gothenburg Strategy
• European Union Sustainable Development Strategy 2006
• Social Agenda 2005-2010
• European Employment Strategy and the Luxembourg Process
Council of the EU
• Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs (EPSCO)
• The Environment Council
Impact Categories/Issues
• Governance
• Employment
• Community Development
• Health and Well-being
• Culture and heritage
Impact Categories/Issues (cont.)
Cross-cutting all issues are concerns for:
participation of affected people in decisions
distribution of social benefits and costs
equality social justice
Governance(public participation, social inclusion, and public attitudes) Does the policy:• impact on the involvement of groups and
stakeholders to participate in governance?• impact on social institutions or public institutions
and administrations in their ability and responsibilities to governance?
• impact on a group or the individual’s access to the legal justice system?
• impact on the public being informed about issues within their community?
• impact on the privacy of individuals and households?
Employment(employment at the local community level)
Does the policy:• facilitate creation of jobs or the loss of jobs?• impact a specific class of workers or
households?• affect the demand for labour?• impact on the functioning of the labour market?• impact on the type and quality of jobs? • impact on the health, safety and dignity of
workers?
Community Development(local social benefits derived from community
participation in commercial activities and policy) Does the policy:• impact on the level of social capital and
activism by non-governmental groups or individuals?
• impact on social inclusion, social cohesion, and distribution of equity and benefits within society?
• impact on the liveability and sense of community wellbeing?
Health and Well-being(1)(physical health and emotional sense of
enjoying and achieving in life)Does the policy:• impact on the quality of soil, surface water, and
ground water? The quality and sufficiency of drinking water is of special importance. What are the health gains or risks that may occur?
• impact on the occupational health risks that may occur with the development?
Health and Well-being(2)• impact development or change of land use on
recreational uses in the area and the effects on the local community as well as non-local visitation to the area?
• impact development on local infrastructure such as hospitals, schools, waste disposal, sanitation, and emergency response capability? Will there be sufficient capacity?
• impact equitable distribution of the health risks, disadvantages and benefits from development?
What is the desirable distribution of the gains and
losses among social groups?
Culture and heritage (1)
(culture is the total range of activities and ideas of a group of people with shared traditions which are transmitted and
reinforced by members of a group)
(heritage can be explained as all the things, places and ideas passed on from the past which are of special cultural
significance to the life of a community, including both cultural and human-built elements)
Culture and heritage (2)
Does the policy:• impact on cultural or heritage issues in a
community • impact on sites and features• impact on activities, practices, skills and events• impact on meanings, identities, and
representations of importance to the community• Impacts on indigenous peoples
Sustainability Impact Assessment Tools (SAIT)
• Currently in development– SENSOR– EFORWOOD– PLUREL – SEAMLESS
Modelling Social Impacts
• Identify the social impacts of a policy, who is affected and the timescale – Causal Model – Qualitative Assessment – Impact Matrix – Measuring factors such as wellbeing?
Example of 1 issue:- Demography
A typology of urban and rural regions with regard to sustainable demographic development
1995-2000 (% of population)
Tot PU SR PR
Per Cent of Population
1 Double positive regions 31,9 35.4 34.3 20.6
2 Growth regions with out-migration 13,6 12.2 15.7 13.0 3 Growth regions with natural decrease 18,0 13.4 19.9 24.2 4 Declining regions with in-migration 9,2 6.9 10.8 11.0 5 Declining regions with natural increase 12,3 14.1 10.6 11.5 6 Double negative regions 15,0 17.8 8.7 19.8
Source. Estimations based on Eurostat data
Balance Sheet Approach
• There is no common matrix by which all social impact issues can be measured!– History of ignoring issues that could not be
quantified numerically or monetarised – Cost/Benefit Analysis will not work
List all benefits/gains v. all costs/losses– Consider distributional effects, equality and
social justice – Weighting of measures
Indicators e.g. Andrea Colantonio (2007)Social1. Access to resources2. Community needs ( e.g. are communities able to articulate their
needs?)3. Conflicts mitigation4. Cultural promotion5. Education6. Elderly and aging7. Enabling knowledge management (including access to E-
knowledge)8. Freedom9. Gender equity10. Happiness11. Health12. Identity of the community/civic pride13. Image transformation and neighbourhood perceptions
IndicatorsSocial cont.
14. Integration of newcomers (especially foreign in-migrants) and residents
15. Leadership16. Justice and equality17. Leisure and sport facilities18. Less able people19. Population change20. Poverty eradication21. Quality of Life22. Security and Crime23. Skills development24. Social diversity and multiculturalism25. Well being
IndicatorsSocio-Institutional26. Capacity Building27. Participation and empowerment28. Trust, voluntary organisations and local networks (also know as SocialCapital)Socio-economic29. Economic security30. Employment31. Informal activities/economy32. Partnership and collaborationSocio-environmental33. Inclusive design34. Infrastructures35. Environmental Health36. Housing (quality and tenure mix)37. Transport38. Spatial/environmental inequalities
Indicators - criticismsFor example:Difficult to measure indicatorsTime horizonCounterfactual – did it make a difference?Combined effects of lots of indicators Σ>parts
Context is important - different cultural interpretations of social and different contexts
- But it is easy to criticise and hard to present something better!
How to Structure Chapters?
Social Well-Being, Cohesion and Human Health
2 proposed methods of presenting material
1) 5 chapters
2) 1 chapter with subsections
Method 1 (5 chapters)
Chapter 11. Social well-being, cohesion and human health impacts
- background and policy context for the social pillar - assessment tools- modelling social impacts
Chapter 12. Governance Chapter 13. Employment and social inclusion Chapter 14. Equality and basic rightsChapter 15. Health impactChapter ? EU Policy
Method 2 (1 chapter with subsections)
Chapter 11. Social well-being, cohesion and human
health impacts§ 11.1 Introduction and policy
background § 11.2 Governance§ 11.3 Employment § 11.4 Community Development§ 11.5 Health and Well-being § 11.6 Culture and heritage§ 11.7 Assessment tools§ 11.8 Modelling social impacts
A Final Comment
The Economics Pillar is still developing asthe principle of sustainable development is difficult to analyse as it is contrary to certain key assumptions/goals of traditional economics
- weak substitutability- discount rates- economic agents- (sustainable) growth as the main
objective
A Final Comment cont.The Social Pillar is the least developed area
of impact assessment- newest (<10-20 years) No systematic model- least developed theoretically due to difficulty in comparing quality issues/impacts with other quality issues & with quantifiable issues/impacts; holistic v reductionalist views etc.- scale of community being analysed dramatically changes the possible matrices and impact issues
Is sustainability the core or is social an ‘add on’ to environment and economic?
Thank you
Employment Research InstituteNapier University, Edinburgh
Institute website: http://www2.napier.ac.uk/depts/eri/home.htm
Diagram: Causal model of impacts – increased timber harvesting
Policy: increase timber harvest
Employment Increase
Wages Increase
Increase in Population
Rents Increase
Low Income Workers Displaced from Housing
Policy/Project Employment/Wages Population Rent
Wages increase (large) *15% average wage increase Likelihood - 50% *Upward wage pressure through out timber sector *Substantial improvement for unemployed as wages are greater than minimum level
Rent increase (small) Likelihood - 30%
Employment increases (large) * Local population employed - 50 jobs *Non-local population employed - 15 jobs (skilled or experienced to manage expansion) Likelihood - 60% All unemployed workers with appropriate skills set are likely to gain full time employment
Population increase (large) Likelihood - 50%
Rent increase (large) Likelihood - 60%
Wages increase (small) *15% average wage increase Likelihood - 50% *Upward wage pressure through out timber sector *Substantial improvement for unemployed as wages are greater than minimum level
Population decrease (small) Likelihood - 10%
Employment increases (small) * Local population employed - 25 jobs *Non-local population employed - 5 jobs (skilled or experienced to manage expansion) Likelihood - 40% Some unemployed workers with appropriate skills set are likely to gain full time employment
Population increase (small) Likelihood - 40%
Rent stable -no change Likelihood - 10%
Chart Combined Qualitative Assessment and Impact Matrix Analysis
Definition of Rural Regions and Typology
• Assessing the pertinence of the OECD classification:– Simple, transparent, takes account of internal patterns within regions,
widely recognised– But major weaknesses include heterogeneity of NUTS 3 regions, ignores
differences in “economic potential” of regions, density thresholds are arbitrary
• 3 alternative options (all incorporating a peripherality index) are presented and assessed, two of these give better discrimination between different types of rural region (assessed by anova test)
Typology according to labour market performance:– Simple transparent disaggregative approach– Separate demography and economic activity/unemployment
typologies– Combined typology – reveals relatively favourable labour
market situation in PU regions, SR and PR more mixed: fewer strong performance regions, more moderately performing regions, and roughly the same proportion of weak regions.
Bottom-line Objective
• Identify the impacts of a potential policy or proposed project
To answer the question:
What can be done to maximise and distribute the social benefits while mitigating the negative impacts/costs to individuals or groups within society?