Evaluating the effectiveness of impact assessment instruments: Theorising the nature and implications of their political constitution

The central role of impact assessment instruments globally in policy integration initiatives has been cemented in recent years. Associated with this trend, but also reflecting political emphasis on greater accountability in certain policy sectors and a renewed focus on economic competitiveness in Western countries, demand has increased for evidence that these instruments are effective (however defined). Resurgent interest in evaluation has not, however, been accompanied by the conceptual developments required to redress longstanding theoretical problems associated with such activities. In order to sharpen effectiveness evaluation theory for impact assessment instruments this article critically examines the neglected issue of their political constitution. Analytical examples are used to concretely explore the nature and significance of the politicisation of impact assessment. It is argued that raising awareness about the political character of impact assessment instruments, in itself, is a vital step in advancing effectiveness evaluation theory. Broader theoretical lessons on the framing of evaluation research are also drawn from the political analysis. We conclude that, at least within the contemporary research context, learning derived from analysing the meaning and implications of plural interpretations of effectiveness represents the most constructive strategy for advancing impact assessment and policy integration theory.

[1]  Douglas Torgerson,et al.  Managing Leviathan: Environmental politics and the administrative state , 1991 .

[2]  O. Bina,et al.  Theorising strategic environmental assessment: fresh perspectives and future challenges , 2007 .

[3]  M. Haugaard Reflections on Seven Ways of Creating Power , 2003 .

[4]  I. Papadopoulos,et al.  An Exploration of Fourth Generation Evaluation in Practice , 2007 .

[5]  B. Cooke,et al.  Power, knowledge and social control in participatory development. , 2001 .

[6]  Who Regional Office for Europe,et al.  Gothenburg Consensus Paper: Health Impact Assessment, Main Concepts and Suggested Approach , 1999 .

[7]  Christoph Knill Introduction: Cross-national policy convergence: concepts, approaches and explanatory factors , 2005 .

[8]  Alan Bond,et al.  Introduction: The effectiveness of impact assessment instruments , 2009 .

[9]  D. Whetten,et al.  Organizational Effectiveness: A Comparison of Multiple Models , 1984 .

[10]  Brian Wynne,et al.  The institutional context of science, models, and policy: The IIASA energy study , 1984 .

[11]  Stephen K. White The Recent Work of Jürgen Habermas: Reason, Justice and Modernity , 1990 .

[12]  Graham D. Burchell,et al.  The birth of biopolitics : lectures at the Collège de France, 1978-79 , 2010 .

[13]  B. Nykvist,et al.  The use and non-use of policy appraisal tools in public policy making: an analysis of three European countries and the European Union , 2008 .

[14]  R. Grove-White New Wine, Old Bottles? Personal Reflections on the New Biotechnology Commissions , 2001 .

[15]  Ciaran O'Faircheallaigh,et al.  Effectiveness in social impact assessment: Aboriginal peoples and resource development in Australia , 2009 .

[16]  M. Goldman Constructing an Environmental State: Eco-governmentality and other Transnational Practices of a ' Green' World Bank , 2001 .

[17]  Bertil Rolf,et al.  DECISION SUPPORT TOOLS AND TWO TYPES OF UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION , 2006 .

[18]  S. Jasanoff,et al.  The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers. , 1991 .

[19]  Carol H. Weiss,et al.  Have We Learned Anything New About the Use of Evaluation? , 1998 .

[20]  M. Hannan,et al.  The Population Ecology of Organizations , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[21]  O. Bina A critical review of the dominant lines of argumentation on the need for strategic environmental assessment , 2007 .

[22]  Bram F. Noble,et al.  Promise and dismay: The state of strategic environmental assessment systems and practices in Canada , 2009 .

[23]  Sybille van den Hove,et al.  A Rationale for Science-Policy Interfaces , 2007 .

[24]  S. Jasanoff,et al.  Introduction Globalization and Environmental Governance , 2022 .

[25]  Sybille van den Hove,et al.  Between consensus and compromise: acknowledging the negotiation dimension in participatory approaches , 2006 .

[26]  V. James,et al.  Environmental impact assessment, a comparative review , 1996 .

[27]  B. Cooke,et al.  Participation: the New Tyranny? , 2001 .

[28]  Alan Bond,et al.  The role and functioning of environmental assessment: theoretical reflections upon an empirical investigation of causation. , 2008, Journal of environmental management.

[29]  Tim Richardson,et al.  Environmental assessment and planning theory: four short stories about power, multiple rationality, and ethics , 2005 .

[30]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[31]  C. Weiss The many meanings of research utilization. , 1979 .

[32]  B. Wynne Seasick on the Third Wave? Subverting the Hegemony of Propositionalism , 2003 .

[33]  L. Datta Politics and Evaluation: More Than Methodology , 2011 .

[34]  Michael Schmidt,et al.  Standards and thresholds for impact assessment , 2008 .

[35]  Sheila Jasanoff,et al.  Earthly politics : local and global in environmental governance , 2004 .

[36]  B. Wynne Uncertainty and environmental learning: reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm. , 1992 .

[37]  R. Cowell,et al.  Evaluation and Environmental Governance: The Institutionalisation of Ecological Footprinting , 2009 .

[38]  Duncan Russel,et al.  The United Kingdom's sustainable development strategies: leading the way or flattering to deceive? , 2007 .

[39]  Lars Emmelin,et al.  Environmental Quality Standards as a Tool in Environmental Governance — the Case of Sweden , 2008 .

[40]  K. Cameron Effectiveness as Paradox: Consensus and Conflict in Conceptions of Organizational Effectiveness , 1986 .

[41]  Rabel J. Burdge The focus of impact assessment (and IAIA) must now shift to global climate change , 2008 .

[42]  T. Fischer Strategic environmental assessment in post-modern times , 2003 .

[43]  Simon Marvin,et al.  Researching the Sustainable City: Three Modes of Interdisciplinarity , 2006 .

[44]  J. Rigg A Particular Place? Laos and its Incorporation into the Development Mainstream , 2009 .

[45]  Susan Owens,et al.  Siting, sustainable development and social priorities , 2004 .

[46]  Bo Elling,et al.  Rationality and effectiveness: does EIA/SEA treat them as synonyms? , 2009 .

[47]  Christopher D. Gerrard,et al.  Sourcebook for evaluating global and regional partnership programs : indicative principles and standards , 2007 .

[48]  D. Anthony Evidence-based Policy: A Realist Perspective , 2007 .

[49]  Chui-Ling Tam Harmony Hurts: Participation and Silent Conflict at an Indonesian Fish Pond , 2006, Environmental management.

[50]  Jiang Ru,et al.  Strategic environmental assessment in China: motivations, politics, and effectiveness. , 2008, Journal of environmental management.

[51]  S. Asmervik,et al.  Megaprojects and Risk. An Anatomy of Ambition , 2004 .

[52]  E. Guba,et al.  Fourth Generation Evaluation , 1989 .

[53]  Ronald B. Mitchell,et al.  Global environmental assessments : information and influence , 2006 .

[54]  Mark Hobart,et al.  An anthropological critique of development : the growth of ignorance , 1995 .

[55]  John Turnpenny,et al.  Rationalising the Policy Mess? Ex Ante Policy Assessment and the Utilisation of Knowledge in the Policy Process , 2009 .

[56]  S. Harrison Rationality and Power: Democracy in Practice , 2001 .

[57]  Paul S. Goodman,et al.  7 – On the Demise of Organizational Effectiveness Studies1 , 1983 .

[58]  John Turnpenny,et al.  Noisy and definitely not normal: responding to wicked issues in the environment, energy and health , 2009 .

[59]  Shiv Visvanathan,et al.  A Carnival for Science: Essays on Science, Technology and Development , 1997, The Journal of Asian Studies.

[60]  A. Jordan Environmental Policy in the European Union: Actors, Institutions and Processes (2nd Edition) , 2005 .

[61]  Jouni Paavola,et al.  Governance for Sustainability: Towards a ‘Thick’ Analysis of Environmental Decisionmaking , 2003 .

[62]  Mark Hobart An anthropological critique of development : the growth of ignorance , 1993 .

[63]  B. Wynne Risk and Environment as Legitimatory Discourses of Technology: Reflexivity Inside Out? , 2002 .

[64]  Tim Richardson,et al.  Exclusion: the necessary difference between ideal and practical consensus , 2004 .

[65]  B. Wynne Knowledges in Context , 1991 .

[66]  Petter Næss Cost-Benefit Analyses of Transportation Investments: Neither critical nor realistic , 2006 .

[67]  Matthew Asa Cashmore,et al.  The role of science in environmental impact assessment: process and procedure versus purpose in the development of theory , 2004 .

[68]  Tim Richardson,et al.  From consultation to deliberation?: tracing deliberative norms in EIA frameworks in Swedish roads planning , 2009 .

[69]  F. Schweigert The Meaning of Effectiveness in Assessing Community Initiatives , 2006 .

[70]  Ulrike Felt,et al.  Taking European Knowledge Society Seriously , 2009 .

[71]  Timothy O'Riordan,et al.  Environmental science for environmental management , 1995 .

[72]  David P. Lawrence,et al.  Environmental Impact Assessment: Practical Solutions to Recurrent Problems , 2003 .

[73]  M. Lane,et al.  The Tyranny of localism: Indigenous participation in community-based environmental management , 2005 .

[74]  Juliet Corbin Criteria for Evaluation , 2007 .

[75]  Matthias Wismar,et al.  The Effectiveness of Health Impact Assessment: Scope and Limitations of Supporting Decision-making in Europe , 2007 .

[76]  Lars Emmelin,et al.  Effective Environmental Assessment Tools - critical reflections on concepts and practice , 2006 .

[77]  Harold D. Lasswell,et al.  Politics: Who Gets What, When, How , 2011 .

[78]  D. Palumbo,et al.  The Politics of Program Evaluation , 1988 .

[79]  J. Petts,et al.  Expert Conceptualisations of the Role of Lay Knowledge in Environmental Decisionmaking: challenges for Deliberative Democracy , 2006 .

[80]  Måns Nilsson,et al.  Are impact assessment procedures actually promoting sustainable development? Institutional perspectives on barriers and opportunities found in the Swedish committee system , 2009 .

[81]  Wiebe E. Bijker,et al.  Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society , 1989 .

[82]  S. D. N. Cook,et al.  Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding policy practices: action, dialectic and deliberation in policy analysis , 2003 .

[83]  Maarten A. Hajer,et al.  Deliberative Policy Analysis: Contents , 2003 .

[84]  Arie Rip,et al.  TAKING EUROPEAN KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY SERIOUSLY Report of the Expert Group on Science and Governance to the Science, Economy and Society Directorate, Directorate-General for Research, European Commission , 2007 .

[85]  Pierre Lascoumes,et al.  Introduction: Understanding Public Policy through Its Instruments—From the Nature of Instruments to the Sociology of Public Policy Instrumentation , 2007 .

[86]  F. Retief EFFECTIVENESS OF STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (SEA) IN SOUTH AFRICA , 2007 .

[87]  C. Radaelli,et al.  Regulatory quality in Europe: Concepts, measures and policy processes , 2007 .

[88]  Douglas Spencer,et al.  The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978–1979 , 2009 .

[89]  Maria Rosário Partidário,et al.  Perspectives on strategic environmental assessment , 2000 .

[90]  Harriet Bulkeley,et al.  Boundary Work: Knowledge, Policy, and the Urban Environment , 2006 .

[91]  Claudio M. Radaelli,et al.  Diffusion without convergence: how political context shapes the adoption of regulatory impact assessment , 2005 .

[92]  Arnold S. Tannenbaum,et al.  A Study of Organizational Effectiveness , 1957 .

[93]  H. Davies,et al.  Using Evidence: How research can inform public services , 2007 .

[94]  Luis Enrique Sánchez,et al.  Tiering strategic environmental assessment and project environmental impact assessment in highway planning in São Paulo, Brazil , 2008 .

[95]  R. Munton,et al.  Land and limits: interpreting sustainability in the planning process , 2002 .

[96]  Y. Dezalay,et al.  The Internationalization of Palace Wars: Lawyers, Economists, and the Contest to Transform Latin American States , 2002 .

[97]  Lars Emmelin,et al.  Evaluating environmental impact assessment systems ‐ part 1: Theoretical and methodological considerations , 1998 .

[98]  Sambit Mallick,et al.  Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States , 2009 .

[99]  M. Hobart Introduction: the growth of ignorance? , 1993 .

[100]  H Roberts,et al.  Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity , 1994 .