26Oct 2018
Why are Cities Good for Sustainability?

Why are Cities Good for Sustainability?

Blog post by Rolands Sadauskis

Is this the new “age of the City”? Millions of people are moving to cities every week[1] and the growing numbers of megacities (with populations of over 10 million) have the capacity to rival nation states in power and influence.  The importance of the city to achieve sustainability outcomes is increasing by the day.  

transport-3168106_1280.jpg

In the urban curriculum cities are viewed as a double edged sword. They epitomise the social, economic and technological achievements of modern day societies. For policy makers, having people in a concentrated space can increase the effectiveness and efficiency of policy implementation, whereas urban citizens enjoy the benefits of more accessible education, health and work opportunities than their rural counterparts. However, there is a down side – cities generate the majority of the global carbon emissions[2] and consume the majority of energy resources[3]. Pollution and mobility challenges, social inequality, inadequate housing, and exposure to climate change impacts (e.g. floods, sea level rise, tropical cyclones etc.) are among many pressing issues that urban populations are facing globally.

Urban governance is a critical part of any urban sustainability solution that seeks to address these challenges. Urban policies are highly interdependent on each other. In this context, it is crucial to identify suitable governance arrangements to take these interdependencies and possible trade-offs into account. Further, cities are also profoundly connected to their suburban and rural hinterland and so their policies and activities can have a wide-ranging impact, especially on resource demand (consumption) and waste management.

green-2662561_640.jpg

In recent decades, numerous cities have actively taken the path towards sustainability and increasingly are acknowledging the efforts required to achieve their ambition by being part of international organisations committed to sustainable development (e.g. c40, ICLEI etc[4].). These cities have been implementing international standards and often applying and moving beyond existing national standards. A good example is the international response to climate change where cities are actively taking the lead in climate action and inspire deeper commitments from national governments and each other, in support of the 2015 Paris Agreement. More recently a new initiative is bringing together mayors from global cities to develop a collective message and engage in a G20 dialogue process with an urban perspective on key sustainability issues. The inaugural Urban 20 Mayors Summit (October 2018) will be the first ever international summit for cities with such a focus on global sustainability issues.

There are numerous benefits from cities taking the required actions and embracing sustainability. A global effort by cities would likely contribute significantly towards the achievement of various global agendas including the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris climate agreement. It would also bring many social, economic and environmental benefits both in cities and their hinterland. 

reims-90939_1280.jpg

Achieving sustainability outcomes (such as highlighted in UN SDGs) requires a collective effort from all levels of policy making. In these efforts cities must and can be part of sustainable solutions on pressing global issues. Existing global trends in their increasing political influence and willingness to take the initiative in addressing the pressing needs of their citizens strongly suggest that cities provide a good platform for enhancing sustainability. Consequently, one should not question the importance of cities in achieving sustainability outcomes, but rather ask – do cities get the power they need to bring about the change required to address them?

by Rolands Sadauskis, Senior Consultant, CEP, 26 October 2018

[1] https://graylinegroup.com/urbanization-catalyst-overview/

[2] https://www.c40.org/why_cities

[3] https://unhabitat.org/urban-themes/energy/

[4] C40 is a network of the world’s megacities committed to addressing climate change, https://www.c40.org/; ICLEI is the leading global network of 1,500+ cities, towns and regions committed to building a sustainable future, https://www.iclei.org/. 

Team CEP
22Oct 2018
Evaluating policy interventions: What role for Theory of Change?

Evaluating policy interventions: What role for Theory of Change?

Blog post by Sian Morse-Jones

What is a Theory of Change (ToC)?  Different terminologies/approaches exist. From an evaluation perspective a ToC commonly articulates how an intervention (e.g. policy, programme, project) is expected to lead to an ultimate goal(s) by showing what needs to happen, in what order and in what way. It establishes the ‘how’ and ‘why’ activities lead to outputs, outcomes and ultimately goals/impacts, explaining the assumptions underpinning this. Usually presented in a diagram or map, a ToC allows big picture thinking, and can help to contextualise where an intervention sits alongside other influences, depicting how external factors may also influence the goal. 

Example Theory of Change diagram for Countryside Stewardship Facilitation Fund (CEP, 2015, Report to Defra)

Example Theory of Change diagram for Countryside Stewardship Facilitation Fund (CEP, 2015, Report to Defra)

In evaluation, having a clear understanding of an intervention’s ToC is incredibly useful for a variety of reasons. It can clarify the causal relationships between different activities, outputs, outcomes and goals and highlight the chief assumptions which underpin why these contribute to specific goals. This can provide pertinent information to inform the evaluation framework, questions, criteria, evidence and needs.

A frequent challenge in the evaluation of policy interventions is that impacts/goals are often long term, for example, the biodiversity benefits from habitat improvement or creation may take years to materialise, or as in the case of emergencies such as flooding, may not manifest within the timeframe of the evaluation. The ToC is a powerful tool in such contexts because it provides a theoretical basis for evaluating these in terms of activities, outputs or outcomes which are measurable.

20150906_174810.jpg

Evaluation of an intervention also provides the opportunity to further test and explore the validity of the ToC, enabling further refinements. Because the ToC tells us that achieving goals rely on specific assumptions, it can be very helpful to explore and consider whether assumptions are correct, why, and in what circumstances? Similarly, if assumptions are not correct, why are they not? What’s not working? In this way, a ToC-based evaluation can help to surface valuable lessons to benefit the design of an intervention, as well as informing policy and practice.

CEP has  much experience in using ToC to evaluate policy interventions – applications include:

  • Our work on Our Bright Futures  to evaluate how, and to what extent, a programme and portfolio of projects aimed at young people, has led to progressive change in outcomes for the young people, the environment, their communities and the economy, as well as the long-term influence and legacy.

  • In the monitoring and evaluation of Nature Improvement Areas for Defra, and

  • In evaluating a project on community engagement on flood risks for Natural Resources Wales.

shutterstock_120960130 Flooding York.jpg

In CEP’s experience, understanding the theory behind ‘how’ and ‘why’ an intervention will have an impact in the real world is a vital part not just of designing effective interventions, but also in evaluation. Yet it is surprisingly rare for policy interventions to be well articulated in a ToC, often because an explicit policy cycle / clear role for how evaluation can be used in future policy is lacking[1].  Getting the ToC right at the outset may not only result in a stronger intervention, but also a more robust and efficient evaluation process, drawing out key lessons for the future direction of policy and implementation.

Dr Sian Morse-Jones, Senior Consultant, CEP, 22 October 2018

[1] For more details see CEP’s meta-evaluation of 10 years’ of our projects: Learning the Lessons for Evaluating Complexity across the Nexus.

 

Team CEP
17Oct 2018
The Fourth Industrial Revolution – where is technology taking us?

The Fourth Industrial Revolution – where is technology taking us?

Blog post by Špela Kolarič

As summarised by the World Economic Forum[1], the first industrial revolution was about mechanising production using water and steam power; the second gave rise to mass production using electric power; and the third was characterised by automated production enabled by electronics and information technology. The fourth industrial revolution is happening now, building on the third it fuses digital, biological and physical spheres.

Technological development, as reflected in policies, was foreseen to lead to a smart, green future, bringing sustainable growth, and fostering values of democracy, freedom and equality. Nevertheless, rapidly developing information communication technology (ICT) is leading to pervasive changes in our everyday life, on a global scale.

network-782707_1280 intenet of things.png

Indeed the emergence of advanced ICT technologies such as the internet of things (IoT), Big data technology, 3D/4D printing and general digitalisation of society brings great opportunities such as potentially decreased environmental pressures due to altered production and consumption patterns, informed and empowered individuals and communities, and development of medicine. However, uptake of these technologies will without a doubt be disruptive for humanity and also poses great threats like unemployment and privacy and security breaches, as people are replaced by machines, and cyber-attacks are increasing.

The ICT technology is running on highly energy intensive infrastructure (e.g. data centres) and ubiquitous devices (e.g. computers, smartphones) with high-replacements rates, creating increasingly more e-waste leading to environmental, health and social implications (e.g. informal recycling). Instead of encouraging democracy and respecting individuals’ discretion, it is becoming obvious that ‘tech’ can be quite the opposite, a ‘totalitarian’ force enabling unprecedented surveillance and control over individuals and organisations. Privacy issues were recognised by governments and led to the EU General Data Protection Regulation.

Events like the hack attack that happened two years ago on a company making electronic toys[2], which led to misplacing videos and pictures of children using devices connected to insecure IoT, do not make many people feel particularly comfortable.  Neither do smart mirrors, nor the thought of being monitored and connected to everything everywhere (home, work, gym, restaurant etc.) at all time. However, it is perhaps the convergence of artificial intelligence (AI) with all these technologies, and in particularly synthetic biology, that many find most disconcerting.

artificial-intelligence-2167835_1280.jpg

As reflected by literature, with developments in genome engineering human enhancement is becoming more and more possible. This brings to mind a Sci-fi novel ‘Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep’[3].  Is it possible that the ethical and moral challenges of an individual and society as described by Philip K. Dick 50 years ago could become our reality? Will we question what it means to be human? Will the question perhaps be answered on our behalf and institutionalised by some higher authority?

For sure, from a certain perspective the consequences of these promising technologies look pretty worrisome. However, the outcomes of the fourth industrial revolution are largely up to us. Policies and sectoral as well as international collaboration will play key roles in regulating new technologies and allowing us to benefit from them. Ultimately, though, we are all responsible for using the technology ethically, particularly making sure it harms neither the environment nor our values of democracy, freedom and equality.

 

Špela Kolarič, Senior Consultant, CEP, 17 October 2018

References:

[1]https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-what-it-means-and-how-to-respond/

[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-35532644

[3] Philip K. Dick (1968), Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, SF Masterworks. London: Orion Books

Team CEP
12Oct 2018
CEP examining pro-environmental behaviours

CEP contributing to study on awareness, attitudes and behaviours relating to the environment

CEP, in partnership with Adranda, have been commissioned by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) to examine pro-environmental behaviours that individuals, institutions or organisations can take to reduce their impact on the environment.

CEP’s role in the project is to conduct an evidence review on pro-environmental behaviours. The first stages to the evidence review are focussing on the subject areas of gardening and food purchasing practices that can support and enhance the environment, whilst in tandem connecting people to nature and addressing the environmental impacts of food. 

Previously the project developed a longlist of environmental behaviours that has been explored in workshops with experts in the field. The review process is being supplemented with interviews and a further workshop with key stakeholders. The project began in January and will come to a close at the end of 2018. For more information, please contact Dr Clare Twigger-Ross.

Team CEP
3Oct 2018
Alex Mackaness joins CEP

NEW CONSULTANT JOINS CEP

Alex Mackaness has recently joined CEP as a consultant. Alex is a biological scientist with a particular interest in environmental science, agriculture, economics and the science-policy interface. He recently completed the MSc in Environmental Technology from Imperial College London, specialising in environmental economics and policy with a focus on agricultural policy, developing country agriculture value chains, energy markets, resource management and environmental valuation.

Alex has strong quantitative and qualitative research and analytical skills, and has experience of undertaking research and analysis whilst working in both the UK and internationally on topics such as: food-security; agriculture and sustainability; illegal wildlife trafficking; vector control and animal behaviour.                   

Alex will be working on a number of projects for CEP, including FORENV – the new EU foresight system to detect emerging environmental issues; links between environment and quality of life for the EEA; and dog owner behaviour for the South Downs National Park.

Team CEP