Evaluating the impact of HIA on urban reconstruction decision-making: Who manages whose risks?

Abstract Practitioners and academic researchers increasingly look to evaluation of health impact assessment (HIA) to improve its practice, its efficiency and its legitimacy. Evaluation is also used to account to policy-makers, who express doubts that the benefits of HIA justify its costs. Until recently evaluation of HIA focused on instrument design and procedures but now the focus needs to shift to analysis of the interaction of HIA and decision-making. Multiple case studies have been applied to identify the conditions in which HIA produces the desired benefits. These studies used analytical concepts derived from the literature on evaluation, knowledge utilization, science of sociology and knowledge management. This paper describes a case study in which the strategic motives of the decision-makers affected the impact of an HIA. This HIA comprised of a quantitative environmental model ‘City & Environment’ that was used to assess environmental health impacts of an urban reconstruction plan in a Dutch city. The evaluation of the HIA shows that the decision to follow the recommendations of the HIA was part of a damage control strategy. The more HIA goals deviate from the policy problem and the less HIA is embedded in institutional procedures, then the more HIA impact will be subject to strategic decision-making behaviour. Appropriate cognitive and social strategies are needed to avoid ‘negative learning’ in those the HIA seeks to influence.

[1]  W. Thissen,et al.  Rationality in decision- and policy-making: implications for strategic environmental assessment , 2000 .

[2]  Charles C. Alton,et al.  Let us make impact assessment more accessible , 2003 .

[3]  Carol H. Weiss,et al.  Social Sciences and Modern States: Policy sciences at the crossroads , 1991 .

[4]  Ernst ten Heuvelhof,et al.  Policy analysis and decision making in a network: how to improve the quality of analysis and the impact on decision making , 2002 .

[5]  Erik-Hans Klijn,et al.  Dealing with Wicked Problems in Networks: Analyzing an Environmental Debate from a Network Perspective , 2003 .

[6]  J Lomas,et al.  Using 'linkage and exchange' to move research into policy at a Canadian foundation. , 2000, Health affairs.

[7]  Carol Hirschon Weiss,et al.  Social Sciences and Modern States: Policy research: data, ideas, or arguments? , 1991 .

[8]  Pablo Kreimer.  Handbook of science mad Technology Studies, Jasanoff, S., Markle, G., Petersen, J. y Pinch, T. (comps.), London, New Delhi, Thousand Oaks, Sage, 1995, 820 páginas , 1995 .

[9]  Kim Putters,et al.  Exploring the relation between evidence and decision-making A political-administrative approach to health impact assessment , 2004 .

[10]  L. Taylor,et al.  Evaluation as a key part of health impact assessment: the English experience. , 2003, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[11]  Harold D. Lasswell,et al.  The Policy Sciences , 1953 .

[12]  A. T. Roper,et al.  Integrating environmental consequences and impact assessment into design processes and corporate strategy , 1999 .

[13]  Mark W. Lipsey,et al.  Evaluation: A Systematic Approach , 1979 .

[14]  Marjorie A. Lyles,et al.  The Blackwell handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management , 2003 .

[15]  R J Quigley,et al.  Evaluating health impact assessment. , 2004, Public health.

[16]  Aleg Cherp,et al.  DEALING WITH CONTINUOUS REFORM: TOWARDS ADAPTIVE EA POLICY SYSTEMS IN COUNTRIES IN TRANSITION , 2003 .

[17]  W. Wende,et al.  Evaluation of the effectiveness and quality of environmental impact assessment in the Federal Republic of Germany , 2002 .

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

[19]  Sheila Jasanoff,et al.  Handbook of Science and Technology Studies , 1995 .

[20]  M. Patton.  Qualitative research and evaluation methods , 1980 .

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

[22]  Michael Quinn Patton,et al.  Utilization-Focused Evaluation , 1979 .

[23]  Marjorie A. Lyles,et al.  Handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management , 2006 .

[24]  Y Ezrahi,et al.  Utopian and pragmatic rationalism: The political context of scientific advice , 1980, Minerva.