CAPACITY BUILDING INTRODUCTION TO PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES GLOBAL MEGATRENDS
CAPACITY BUILDING: INTRODUCTION TO PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES GLOBAL MEGATRENDS AND CAUSAL MAPPING Delivered as part of contract no. 4301618/2017 -12 on the analysis of the impact of megatrends on the state of the environment in Slovenia 8 t h November 2017 Owen White, Rolands Sadauskis, Spela Kolaric 1
INTRODUCTION 2
OBJECTIVES To provide an introduction to participatory approaches To present examples of tools and techniques used by CEP To explore the use of one tool through a practical exercise: causal mapping To introduce global megatrend analysis and complexity To provide an opportunity for participants to share experiences and learn from each other 3
OUTLINE OF THE DAY Participant sharing: ice breaker and setting the scene Presentation: Introduction to participatory approaches Presentation: Global Megatrends, complexity and the value of participatory approaches Practical working session: using causal maps Participant sharing: future plans and ideas Coffee – 10: 30 Close - 13: 00 4
SHARING EXPERIENCES On your tables Think about your personal experiences of ‘participatory approaches’ Write down on post-it notes experiences you remember Maybe think of some good, some less good After 5 minutes, put post-its together in middle of table and discuss: § What do we mean by ‘participatory processes’? § How do experiences compare? 5
INTRODUCTION TO PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES 6
WHAT ARE PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES? An umbrella term for processes that involve stakeholders/interest groups/members of the public in an active way to contribute to an outcome Conducting a research or planning process with those who may be effected by or involved in the implementation 7
REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTICIPATION Aarhus Convention principles adopted by EU and reflected in EU directives (e. g. Water Framework Directive, SEA Directive, Floods Directive etc. ): three pillars of participation § Access to information § Consultation and engagement § Access to justice ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND DEMOCRACY PILLAR 1: Access to information PILLAR 2: Public participation in decision-making PILLAR 3: Access to justice 8
WHY USE PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES? To involve experts, civil society (e. g. NGOs) or the public in decisions To improve communication and opportunities to inform To build trust in governance, by letting people know what decisions are being made and how they can be involved To gain insights from a range of perspectives: co-creation of knowledge To help make and improve decisions: identifying common interests; recognising conflicts of interest and trade-offs 9
TYPES OF PARTICIPATION Type of participation Participation goal Inform Provide info. to assist understanding Less Participative E. g. Newsletters, publications Consult Involve Collaborate Empower Obtain feedback Work directly with experts / public & consider their concerns / aspirations Work directly with experts / public & develop solutions Give decision -making power to experts / public E. g. Public / expert meetings E. g. Workshops involving active collaboration / group working More Participative E. g. Joint steering groups 10
EXAMPLES OF SPECIFIC TOOLS Facilitated group working Causal chains and network analysis Participatory spatial mapping Also relevant are ‘public dialogue’ processes, however not presented here 11
FACILITATED GROUP WORKING What is it? § Structured discussions with small groups of experts / the public who are provided with background information and key issues / questions to discuss Why use it? § To provide a structured approach to discussing problems and solutions § To ensure that all participants feel able to contribute § To collect views in a transparent way and enable different views to be expressed and considered openly 12
FACILITATED GROUP WORKING: EXAMPLE Development of a systematic framework for the identification of emerging risks to the EU environment (client DG Environment) In a brainstorming (20 expert participants), small working groups took part in a four step ‘carousel’ with sub-sessions of 15 mins Discussion topics to included: § Expectations and purpose of a systematic framework § Opportunities and threats to a systematic framework § Known needs and gaps, e. g. methods, data Ideas and notes were pooled and key themes, messages collected which then were used to prepare the draft framework 13
CAUSAL CHAINS / MIND MAPPING What is it? § The presentation, normally visually, of cause and effect relationships where one event or factor results in change in the next • Mindmaps connect factors based on logic, and help organise information and ideas: • Causal chains indicate a flow of causation e. g. from driver to effect/s to receptor 14
CAUSAL CHAINS / MIND MAPPING Why use them? § To help discuss complex issues in a visual manner § To engage experts or the public in a topic by providing the opportunity to actively contribute to thinking § To enable groups of experts to contribute to a common understanding § To help generate plausible / defensible outcomes in a transparent manner 15
NOTE: CAUSAL THINKING VS SYSTEMS THINKING Linear causal thinking implies ‘direct’ causation Causal loop or systems thinking makes distinction between what is causing the action and the actor’s decisions 16
HOWEVER As a participatory tool linear causal diagrams and mindmaps are generally more effective People can engage actively in them Non modelling experts can understand work with them They can be quick to generate and easy to communicate They are appropriate for thinking about causal relationships and effects 17
CAUSAL CHAINS / NETWORK ANALYSIS Driver Primary effects Secondary effects Tertiary effects Receptors 18
CAUSAL CHAINS / NETWORK ANALYSIS TABLE EXERCISE Infrastructure investment plan Increased road building More journeys by car Increased air pollution Health impacts Demand for more roads On tables (10 mins) § Look at the simple illustrative causal chain § Discuss how you might further develop it? What other drivers and effects may there be? What other impacts could there be? Plenary (5 mins) § Quick feedback: queries, concerns, how did the approach help explore different perspectives? 19
SCHEMATIC OF CAUSE – EFFECT FLOWS 20
21
OVERVIEW OF STEPS IN CAUSAL / NETWORK ANALYSIS List drivers associated with a key issue, topic of plan / policy option etc. Indicate the key impacts induced by these changes on the area of interest (country, region, sector) Identify valued environmental resources or receptors Identify direct impacts of drivers on receptors Identify pathways of impacts Identify secondary and tertiary impacts on the main receptor (and other receptors) 22
EXAMPLES FROM CEP EXPERIENCE 25
CAUSAL CHAINS / NETWORK ANALYSIS EXAMPLES CEP examples of using causal chains as a participatory tool: § Understanding implications of global megatrends in Western Balkans § Developing a climate change adaptation strategy for London § Overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation in South East England § Mapping barriers to biodiversity offsetting by developers 26
EXAMPLE OF GMT STORYLINE FROM WESTERN BALKANS PROJECT: AS PREPARED BY PROJECT TEAM 27
EXAMPLE OF GMT STORYLINE FROM WESTERN BALKANS PROJECT: WITH PARTICIPANT NOTES 28
EXAMPLE OF GMT STORYLINE FROM WESTERN BALKANS PROJECT: EDITED FOLLOWING WORKSHOP 29
CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION OPTIONS IN LONDON Exploring +ve and –ve effects of different adaptation options What we did: • Groups allocated one of three network diagrams for a carousel exercise • Groups commented on draft network diagrams for hot, wet, dry – 30 mins (15, 10, 5) • Post edited diagrams on the wall • Plenary discussion 30
OVERCOMING BARRIERS TO CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION Identifying and discussing barriers to climate adaptation in South East England What we did: § Presented information from research / interviews § Provided overview network maps § Invited experts in small groups to review, discuss and edit § Collected feedback and amended diagrams 31
PARTICIPATORY MAPPING: EXAMPLE OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES 32
MAPPING BARRIERS TO BIODIVERSITY OFFSETTING 33
GLOBAL MEGATRENDS, COMPLEXITY AND PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES 34
WHAT ARE GLOBAL MEGATRENDS? Definition (EEA) Large-scale and high-impact social, economic, political, environmental or technological long-term change processes with decisive and critical implications This presentation focusses on the global megatrends analysed by the European Environment Agency as part of the European State and Outlook Report (2010, 2015) 35
HOW ARE THEY IDENTIFIED? For EEA: the GMTs are collections of drivers and trends, brought together (structured) through discussion and analysis e. g. of common drivers, emerging trends Based on analysis of literature and data in term of indicators, outlook indicators and scenarios Process was supported by expert discussion / advisory group Other plausible global views are possible: a review for EEA identified at least 30 other ‘megatrend’ studies by a variety of institutions 36
WHY THINK ABOUT GLOBAL TRENDS? Europe is bound to the rest of the world through multiple systems, enabling two-way flows of materials, financial resources, innovations and ideas Europe's ecological and societal resilience is significantly affected by a variety of global megatrends Boundaries between developments in Europe and other parts of the world are increasingly blurred Europeans are increasingly likely to be affected by developments in distant regions — some very sudden, others unfolding over decades 37
GLOBAL MEGATRENDS ANALYSED BY EEA 38
EXAMPLE: GMT 4 ACCELERATING TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE The unprecedented pace of technological change provides opportunities to reduce humanity’s impact on the environment and reliance on non-renewable natural resources, while improving lifestyles, stimulating innovation and green growth. Environment-related patent applications to the European Patent Office, 1980– 2010 Innovation, however, brings also risks, which could be minimised with policies. Source: OECD, 2014. 39
EXAMPLE: GMT 6 – INCREASINGLY MULTIPOLAR WORLD OECD share of global GDP 2000 77% 2050 42% Regional composition of global GDP, 2000– 2050 Driven by rapid structural change, large and rapidly growing working-age populations and trade liberalisation, emerging economies are increasing their significance. Source: OECD Long-term Baseline Projections 2014 40
EXAMPLE: GMT 7 INCREASING GLOBAL COMPETITION FOR RESOURCES World materials use has grown 10 -fold since 1900 and may double again by 2030 The geographic concentration of some reserves creates supply risks Proportion of global production of EU critical raw materials within a single country, 2010– 2012 Source: European Commission 2014 Imports from outside the EU accounted for 58 % of EU-27 consumption of metal ores and products in 2011 and 79 % of fossil fuels 41
VALUE OF USING PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES FOR ANALYSING GMTS Partial evidence, data are often lacking Big uncertainties, especially for outlooks Broad scope, meaning complex interactions and relationships especially across different scales Many concepts and systems not fully understood (e. g. planetary boundaries) Need for judgement based approaches reflecting values and priorities, and to discuss a range of possible outcomes 42
WHAT PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES HAVE BEEN USED? Method toolkit (basis for Slovenia GMT implications study) § https: //www. eea. europa. eu/publications/mapping-europesenvironmental-future-understanding Facilitated discussion and brainstorming Mind-maps (e. g. Swiss national GMT implications study) Causal chains (e. g. Western Balkans GMT implications study) Causal loop diagrams and system dynamics modelling (e. g. Megatrends in Flanders study) § http: //www. milieurapport. be/en/publications/outlookreports/megatrends-report 43
PRACTICAL EXERCISE: CAUSAL MAPPING 44
EXERCISE Suggested issues and receptors § Issue: Agricultural intensification / Receptor: pollution of water courses § Issue: Transitional freight transport / Receptor: human health First, individually think about and write down in a list (15 mins) § Key drivers of the issue § Potential effects on the receptor § Are there other important receptors? Second, in groups on paper provided (45 mins) § Discuss the lists of drivers and effects § Draw a causal chain by mapping out drivers, primary, secondary, tertiary effects and receptors Think about what is the original ‘cause’ for which you are trying to identify effects, and what is the ‘perturbation’ / disturbance created that gives rise to effects 45
DISCUSSION How did you start to think about the drivers / effects / receptors? Were there any differences in views? What might be needed to engage non-experts in such an exercise? Any other reflections or comments? 46
SHARING EXPERIENCES On your tables Think about opportunities in your work to make use of ‘participatory approaches’ § Are there specific projects, processes or research that may require the use of such techniques? § What specific approaches might you use? Write down on post-it notes ideas or opportunities to use such approaches in the next year After 10 minutes, put post-its together in middle of table and discuss: § What common drivers or requirements for participation are there? § What techniques / tools might be used? § Are the opportunities to work together or share experience? 47
CONTACT DETAILS Owen White / Rolands Sadauskis Collingwood Environmental Planning (CEP) 1 E, The Chandlery 50 Westminster Bridge Road London SE 1 7 QY UK tel. +44 (0)20 7407 8700 Fax +44 (0)20 7928 6950 email o. white@cep. co. uk / r. sadauskis@cep. co. uk website www. cep. co. uk 48
- Slides: 46