Integrated socio-economic assessment frameworks for NRM
Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Water (2004), report prepared by Jeanette Stanley, Beth Clouston and Jim Binney.
This guide offers practical advice for undertaking social and economic impact assessments when designing Natural Resource Management (NRM) plans and investment strategies. By following the basic procedures outlined in these guidelines and involving the public in the SEIA and decision-making process, regional NRM bodies can both identify potential impacts, while also avoiding conflict of proposed management actions.
Independent Advisory Committee on Socio-economic Analysis (1998)
The Guidelines provide River, Groundwater and Water Management Committees with an understanding of how they might carry out a community based socio-economic assessment in the context of the broader water reform process. The framework recommended by the Independent Advisory Committee is designed to assist Committees in carrying out socioeconomic assessments in a way which will enhance effective participation in an adaptive process, while ensuring a consistent approach is taken across the State. The attachments and the ‘Glossary of Techniques’ (below) may be of additional interest.
Department of the Environment and Heritage (2005)
The toolkit comprises a general guide to undertaking socio-economic impact assessment (SEIA), followed by specific guides to methods and sources of information which can be used in assessing the potential impacts of proposed Marine Protected Areas on these selected sectors. It provides a range of options for assessing social and economic impacts, and advice on appropriate methods for particular situations. It covers methods for assessing direct and indirect impacts. Uses and limitations of each method are included, such as likely cost and time required to implement, and the type of information each method can provide. The toolkit draws on the wide range of methods for SEIA, and presents those most applicable in the MPA context. Each method is outlined but not detailed in-depth due to the ease of accessing methodological information elsewhere.
David J Pannell (2009)
The Investment Framework for Environmental Resources (INFFER) is a new asset-based approach to natural resource management. The core aim of INFFER is to help investors to achieve the highest value environmental and natural resource outcomes that are possible with the available resources. It covers environmental threats such as water quality decline, salinity, biodiversity decline and pest plant and animals. The approach starts by identifying the environmental assets that may warrant investment and proceeds through a series of steps for each asset: collecting specific information about the asset and its potential management; evaluating the cost effectiveness of investment; and identifying appropriate policy responses. It identifies projects with the best prospects.
The approach is squarely focused on achieving NRM outcomes cost-effectively. INFFER requires environmental managersto be more explicit in identifying the highest-value assets, the threats they face, the degree of current or future damage they face, the technical feasibility of reducing that damage, and the adoptability of relevant works by land managers.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (2000)
The US EPA Guidelines establish a framework for performing economic analyses of environmental regulations and policies. They incorporate recent advances in the field of environmental economics. The Guidelines provide guidance on analysing the economic impacts of regulations and policies, and assessing the distribution of costs and benefits among various segments of the population, with a particular focus on disadvantaged and vulnerable groups.
The Guidelines address:
- Treatment of uncertainty and non-monetary information
- Estimating the value of reducing fatal risks
- Defining baseline conditions (i.e. contrasting the state of the economy and environment with and without a proposed regulatory policy)
- Discounting and comparing differences in the timing of benefits and costs
- Examining environmental justice concerns in economic analyses
- Assessing who pays the costs and receives the benefits of regulations
- Locating available data sources for conducting economic analyses.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (2002)
The US EPA identified the need for a common approach to analysing ecological benefits and a better understanding of both the scientific and economic techniques used in these analyses. This document is intended to address these needs by (1) proposing a common framework for the economic analysis of ecological benefits and (2) discussing the elements of ecological risk assessment and economic benefit analysis.
The goal of the Framework is to provide a structure for conducting benefits assessments for the purpose of informing risk management decisions and to meet risk management objectives. It is most applicable for determining, as part of a benefit cost analysis, the ecological benefits of policies or regulatory actions commonly undertaken by governmental agencies such as the EPA.
Collins D and Whitten S (2007), Report to the NSW CMA Chairs’ Council, prepared by the BDA Group and CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
In this report, a preliminary overview of experiences with Market-Based Instruments (MBIs) for NRM is canvassed, and a framework for the selection of MBIs across differing biophysical, economic and stakeholder contexts is presented. This study was initiated to assist NSW Catchment Management Authorities (CMAs) in their selection and use of MBIs. The objectives of this study were:
- To provide background on the range and implementation experience of MBIs both in NSW and more broadly;
- To provide a framework to aid in decisions of when and if to use an MBI, and in selecting an appropriate type of MBI;
- To identify the institutional environment & CMA organizational capacity to support MBIs; and,
- To recommend an Action Plan to promote more widespread use of MBIs by CMAs and to garner the necessary support from the various levels of government.
A final report documents the findings and recommends an Action Plan to promote more widespread use of MBIs by CMAs.
Page last updated: 28 May 2018
