A symposium for IA practitioners and researchers: How do we do more with less – responding to the challenges of reducing resources and streamlining
Proceedings
Introduction
On July 6th and 7th 2015, around 40 impact assessment (IA) practitioners and researchers gathered in Brisbane to explore the state of IA in Australia. The key issues addressed at the symposium was -“How do we continue to do effective IA in response to these two agendas?” A number of subsequent questions followed:
1. Can we do better scoping to focus on what matters to decision makers?
2. What role for SEA?
3. How can we do better SIA and HIA in response to these agendas?
4. Do we need to focus on better measurement of effectiveness?
5. Re-discovering the mitigation hierarchy.
6. How do we align the State IAs processes with adequate protection of Matters of NES?
7. What will be the new focus of IA with the end of the resources boom?
The symposium was highly interactive with some formal presentations and plenty of time set aside for discussion. The formal presentations served to stimulate discussion.
I am preparing a summary of the main ideas and outcomes of the discussions and will post a link where you can download this document ver y soon - literally, watch this space.
Below is the summary of the program with links to the PDF versions of the formal presentations and abstracts.
Day one (Monday 6th July)
Session 1 – State of IA around the Nation
The purpose of this session was share our knowledge of the trends and new developments in IA in each Australian jurisdiction and to critically examine how well we are “doing more with less”? Some key questions posed were:
What are the national trends?
- What have we learnt?
- How can we share learning?
- What are doing better?
- What are the concerns?
Below are the presentations made in this session. You can click on the live links to download the PDF versions of the formal presentation.
- International - Angus Morrison-Saunders;
- Commonwealth - Carolyn Cameron;
- NT - Jeff Richardson and Rod Johnson
- Qld - Claire Gronow;
- Vic - Geoff Ralphs
- SA - Lachie Wilkinson - summary document
- WA – Garry Middle
- NSW – Joy Duncan
Day one (Monday 6th July) - Session 2 – doing more with less I
In this session we examined key steps in the IA process including the use of tools and looks for ways of “doing more with less” including the identification of any barriers. Four papers were presented in this session as ideas and discussion starters.
1.Generic Terms of Reference under SDPWO Act: one step forward two steps back? Geraldine Squires and Julie Keane
Overview Has the introduction of the generic terms of reference in Queensland achieved its goal of better and more focused scoping? Can we invest a little more upfront to ‘do more with less’?
Key questions
- How significant is good scoping in doing more with less?
- Do the gains in doing prescriptive generic rather than case-by-case scoping have unintended effectiveness outcomes later in the assessment process?
- If case-by-case scoping is preferable to prescriptive generic scoping, how do we avoid over-scoping projects?
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: ABSTRACT and PDF OF PRESENTATION
2. UQ Cumulative Impacts Tool Kit - Will Rifkin et al
Overview: An online tool kit is now available to assess, monitor, and address cumulative social and economic impacts of natural resource development is presented and the possibilities of using this tool to “do more with less” is discussed.
Key questions
- What roles can tool kits like this play in the formal IA processes?
- Do managing the screening process – i.e reducing the need for IAs?
- Do they lead to better scoping?
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: ABSTRACT AND PDF OF PRESENTATION
3. Doing more with what we have. Jeff Richardson
Overview: A model is presented that has the potential to improve the current IA process and achieve better than current outcomes. The model draws on environmental risk assessment to better define the IA processes or, specifically, the assessment part of IA.
Key questions
- What stages of the IA process are best suited to risk assessment?
- How do you introduce risk assessment in when institutions are risk adverse?
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: ABSTRACT and PDF OF PRESENTATION
4. A Review of the submissions to the Senate Environmental Offsets Inquiry: Are there critical issues? Garry Middle
Overview: The submissions to the Senate Environmental Offsets Inquiry are reviewed to examine if there critical issues that could impacts on the effectiveness of IA and whether there are lessons for “doing more with less”.
Key questions
- Has the increased use of offsets lead to more efficient IAs – i.e. getting more out of less?
- Has increased use of offsets lead to better environmental gains and outcomes from IAs - – i.e. getting more out of less?
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: PDF OF PRESENTATION
Day one (Monday 6th July) - Session 3 – doing more with less II
In this session we looked beyond typical project IA and examined both SEA and the role of stakeholders. As with the previous session, three papers were presented as ideas and discussion starters.
1. The imperative for integrated SEA - Carolyn Cameron
Overview: Systemic SEA as an integrating process could provide the methodology and focus required for improved decision making by governments and the private sector, including establishing an improved foundation for planning and environmental assessment. Key question: how to apply integrated SEA to improve the quality and transparency of regional planning and environmental assessment decision-making. In the current climate of doing more with less on impact assessments, there is a clear opportunity to establish an improved foundation for planning and environmental assessment. Systemic SEA as an integrating process could provide the methodology and focus required for improved decision making by governments and the private sector.
Key questions
- Can the greater use of SEA help us do more with less at the project level IA?\
- If so, how do we encourage/nudge/cajole jurisdictions to do more SEA? Is it an argument that doing more upfront leads to much less at the back end?
- Are there good case studies of good SEA leading to fewer project IAs but good environmental outcomes?
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: ABSTRACT and PDF OF PRESENTATION
2. How Strategic Environmental Assessment can inform lenders about potential environmental risk? Zsuzsa Banhalmi-Zakar and Sanne Vammen Larsen
Overview: What is the potential for SEA to be a useful tool for banks to manage environmental risks and inform lending decisions and can SEA by banks contribute to the sustainability goals?
Key questions
- How does an SEA carried out by a bank differ from and agency SEA carried out on a bank’s lending program?
- How would it help us “do more with less”?
- Would a bank driven SEA avoid projects with potentially significant environmental impacts - e.g. ports in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park – getting past the pre-feasibility stage?
- What other types of institutions could adopt the same approach?
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: ABSTRACT and PDF OF PRESENTATION
3. Making the Case to Demonstrate the Benefits of IA - Angus Morrison-Saunders
Overview: This paper outlines a methodology for determining the benefits of impact assessment to proponents and other stakeholders based on learning from the business and management professions. The question of “doing more with less” will be explored.
Key questions
- How better informed stakeholders help us “do more with less”
- What additional disciplines and frameworks can we draw on to demonstrate benefits of IA to proponents and key stakeholders?
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: PDF OF PRESENTATION
Day two Tuesday 7th July – researching ‘doing more with less in IA’.
This day, in part, built on the outcomes of Day one and involved two sessions.
- Research presentations. This is an opportunity for researchers to give a short presentations of their current research in IA which address the ‘doing more with less’ theme, with the aim of either seeking advice on that research or seeking possible collaborations with other researchers.
- Future collaborative research opportunities. This will be a round table discussion based on the outcomes of day 1, exploring potential collaborative research opportunities.
Session 4: Research papers
1. Exploring the effect of environmental assessment. Claire Gronow et al
Overview: This research explores the effectiveness of EA in terms of decision-making, reduction of environmental impacts, public discourse, and organisational change.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: ABSTRACT and PDF OF PRESENTATION
2. Realising Sustainability through Environmental Impact Assessment. Virginia Dahlitz
Overview: The aim of this research is to understand how sustainability might be realised through environmental impact assessment by comparing and evaluating the implications of different sustainability paradigms on EIA processes and outcomes.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: ABSTRACT and PDF OF PRESENTATION
3. International Perspectives on Impact Assessment Research – where to from here? - Angus Morrison-Saunders
Overview: Drawing on several recent publications regarding current and future needs for impact assessment research, this presentation seeks to determine answers to two questions: (1) What are important areas for IA research?; and (2) Why, and how would this research best be conducted?
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: PDF OF PRESENTATION
4. How effective is the mitigation hierarchy: Are we avoiding “avoid” and maximizing the offsetting? Garry Middle
Overview: The submissions to the Senate Environmental Offsets Inquiry and recent IAs completed in WA where offsets have been applied are reviewed to provide a preliminary assessment as to whether there is a risk that the greater use of offsets is impacting on the application of the mitigation hierarchy. Is this research worth taking further and if so how should it be done? Are there collaboration opportunities?
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD: PDF OF PRESENTATION