Step 2 - Structure the social problem

Method:
In order to be able to conduct a sustainability assessment of any kind (evaluation, deliberation, etc.) the social choice problem needs to be organised in terms of the actors concerned, the situations or options being assessed, and the value criteria.

This means you should develop, in a pragmatic way, typologies or classifications of:

(a) stakeholders(actors)who are impacted by the problem or by the impact of the means of addressing it;

(b) policies, strategy options, or scenarios to be appraised and;

(c) performance issues for the social choice problem.

These are the broad issues against which the performance of the policies, options or scenarios will be appraised. (forexample: preservation of the environment, decent work, health, etc.).

Stakeholder categories gather all the actors involved in a way or another in the social choice problem chosen, that is from the promoters of the project or the infrastructure, to the categories of people affected (economic sectors, communities, etc.), the authorities regulating or not regulating the project, etc.

Policies/Strategies/Options. According to the type of social choice problem (project, activity or infrastructure already existing, etc.) one or the other of those categories (Policies/Strategies/Options/Scenarios…) can be used. This type of information should be accessible with gathering information (see advice below).

Identifying performance issues is a task little bit more difficult to grasp on a first approach. But it brings us to the core of sustainability assessment, and to a very common and good sense idea, as we see in the following common thoughts:

“Depending on the options, the scenarios, etc. what is good for the environment, is not necessarily good for jobs and for the economy.”
“What is good for the economy is not necessarily good for heath, etc.“

The idea is to identify what could be the important issues under which people (stakeholders) will produce judgements on the different options or scenarios. Because the Integraal framework is iterative, the list of issues can evolve in the process, or rather in another round of the cycle. But it should, for purpose of evaluation, be settled at some point, and should reflect, the better possible, the preoccupation of the stakeholders.

These three axes can then be used to construct a first qualitative appraisal of the patterns of conflict in the situation. This is done using Variation A of the KerDST online tool. See Appendix 2 for more detailed information on KerDST.

Advice from REEDS:

REEDS can help you understand the three categories of information required to structure the social choice problem, and structure your social choice problem according to those 3 categories.

a. Stakeholders: You can review your case study report in progress and gather all mentions to the stakeholders involved. As in the part “Description of the project”: “Involved communities”, “Actors promoting/funding the project”, in “The conflict”: “Stakeholders/protagonists involved and their roles

b. Policies/Strategies/Options: this should be accessible with gathering information on (i) the project or activity described; (ii) the alternatives proposed by different stakeholders, including (iii) the alternatives under discussion, and those that can be easily contemplated, such as business as usual.

It is advisable to define 3 to 5 scenarios, so as to avoid a binary definition of alternatives (2 choices), or to get dispersed into too many scenarios which in that case usually don’t concentrate on essential elements. A distinction between the following types of clear-cut scenarios is common: a technological scenario, a scenario based on societal response, a business-as-usual scenario.

c. Performance issues for the social choice problem. There are several ways of establishing a list of those issues, depending on the way the social choice exercise is organised. Information on this is available through published articles. The KerDST Deliberation Tool has been applied on various European projects such as GOUVERNe, VIRTUALIS, ALARM, ECOST, SPICOSA. PhD students Hery Rakotovao, Aurelie Chamaret, laura Maxim, Charlotte da Cunha, Natacha Amorsi have used these tools in their theses case studies. Refer to Vahinala Raharinirina, Martin O’Connor, REEDS Research report No. 2010-04. Présentation des terrains et des axes des applications du kiosque aux indicateurs Kerbabel (KIK) & de la Matrice de Délibération for detailed information.

Getting started:

i. A convenient way to start defining performance issues is to take a table with the 4 dimensions of sustainable development, and try to see what issues fit in the intersection of one or several dimensions: economic, social, environmental, governance.

A simple matrix for building issues and related indicators

ii. You can also start from the 4 capitals theory (social, economic, natural, human). Each of those capitals has specific properties. They can be seen as forming together a prism, thus the 4 capitals are non-substitutable, and can’t be aggregated into one capital only.Health is often a good proxy for human capital.

•  For further insight read “the four spheres framework for sustainability” in Brocéliande.

Figure 5: The four-spheres model of sustainability (M. O'Connor et al.)

iii. Alternatively, you can start from the category “Impacts of the project” in the Outline document. But think also of the positive and negative impacts of its alternatives, as stated above.

Advice from REEDS:

The REEDS team can help you structure your social choice problem in the categories of information mentioned above, i.e. we can help you identify stakeholder, scenarios, and issues for your social choice problem. We will not do this identification for you, but will help you develop the capacities to do it.

Output:

A summary of this exploration of the social choice problem, with the 3 categories of information needed.You can link it to your documents online.