Investigating the effectiveness of mandatory integration of health impact assessment within environmental impact assessment (EIA): a case study of Thailand

Chanchitpricha, Chaunjit; Bond, Alan

doi:10.1080/14615517.2017.1364019

Cited by 18 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Past experience with EIA shows that policy makers struggle to satisfy policy goals including political, economic and social aims, are challenged to find ways for enforcing EIA recommendations, and that governments are concerned about how to integrate different policy initiatives [ 46 , 47 ]. Stakeholders from Port Louis highlight similar issues.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framework for Participatory Quantitative Health Impact Assessment in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Thondoo

Vries

Rojas-Rueda

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Conducting health impact assessments (HIAs) is a growing practice in various organizations and countries, yet scholarly interest in HIAs has primarily focused on the synergies between exposure and health outcomes. This limits our understanding of what factors influence HIAs and the uptake of their outcomes. This paper presents a framework for conducting participatory quantitative HIA (PQHIA) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), including integrating the outcomes back into society after an HIA is conducted. The study responds to the question: what are the different components of a participatory quantitative model that can influence HIA implementation in LMICs? Methods: To build the framework, we used a case study from a PQHIA fieldwork model developed in Port Louis (Mauritius). To explore thinking on the participatory components of the framework, we extract and analyze data from ethnographic material including fieldnotes, interviews, focus group discussions and feedback exercises with 14 stakeholders from the same case study. We confirm the validity of the ethnographic data using five quality criteria: credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability, and authenticity. We build the PQHIA framework connecting the main HIA steps with factors influencing HIAs. Results: The final framework depicts the five standard HIA stages and summarizes participatory activities and outcomes. It also reflects key factors influencing PQHIA practice and uptake of HIA outcomes: costs for participation, HIA knowledge and interest of stakeholders, social responsibility of policymakers, existing policies, data availability, citizen participation, multi-level stakeholder engagement and multisectoral coordination. The framework suggests that factors necessary to complete a participatory HIA are the same needed to re-integrate HIA results back into the society. There are three different areas that can act as facilitators to PQHIAs: good governance, evidence-based policy making, and access to resources. Conclusions: The framework has several implications for research and practice. It underlines the importance of applying participatory approaches critically while providing a blueprint for methods to engage local stakeholders. Participatory approaches in quantitative HIAs are complex and demand a nuanced understanding of the context. Therefore, the political and cultural contexts in which HIA is conducted will define how the framework is applied. Finally, the framework underlines that participation in HIA does not need to be expensive or time consuming for the assessor or the participant. Yet, participatory quantitative models need to be contextually developed and integrated if they are to provide health benefits and be beneficial for the participants. This integration can be facilitated by investing in opportunities that fuel good governance and evidence-based policy making.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framework for Participatory Quantitative Health Impact Assessment in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Thondoo

Vries

Rojas-Rueda

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This research was conducted using a qualitative approach involving literature review, encompassing reviews of legislation, guidance documents, Government reports and past evaluations (related to IA practice in Thailand, which have been published as presented in Table 1, (for example, Baird andFrankel 2015, Wangwongwattana et al 2015)). The past evaluations encompass data collections based on documentary analysis for measuring SEA effectiveness (Chanchitpricha et al 2019) and documentary analysis coupled with stakeholder interviews for investigating the effectiveness of HIA and environmental and health impact assessment (EHIA) (Chanchitpricha 2012, Chanchitpricha and Bond 2018, Fakkum 2013, Wangwongwattana et al 2015. (Chanchitpricha, Morrison-Saunders andBond 2019, Wirutskulshai et al 2011) In order to reflect on past practice, in this paper, we examined the effectiveness of Thai IA practice based on the recent conceptualisations of effectiveness (Chanchitpricha et al 2019), associated with a timeline of the evolution of Thai practice.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, it was highlighted that guidelines on IA practice and public participation in the IA process should be clear and appropriate to apply in real practice (e.g. Chanchitpricha and Bond 2018). Montaño and Fischer (2019) argued that the 'institutional and normative context' can't be overlooked in providing upto-date guidance for SEA / IA practice to help improve its effectiveness.…”

Section: History Of the Impact Assessment (Ia) System In Thailandmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In terms of public participation in the IA process, for Thai EIA and EHIA practice, this has to be arranged as required by regulations, and the IA findings have to be to identify stakeholders in real practice (Chanchitpricha and Bond 2018). These findings lead to the reflection that impact assessment in Thailand has not yet achieved procedural effectiveness fully (see Table 4).…”

Section: History Of the Impact Assessment (Ia) System In Thailandmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evolution or revolution? Reflecting on IA effectiveness in Thailand

Chanchitpricha

Bond

2019

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates whether the Thai impact assessment (IA) system should develop through revolution or evolution. A timeline of the Thai IA system is mapped to show its development to date. Aspects of effectiveness (i.e. procedural, substantive, transactive, and legitimacy) are then used as the benchmark against which to evaluate past IA practice in terms of strengths, limitations and challenges. IA practice is analysed both in terms of the people within the IA system and the IA system itself, as both are considered key elements in making IA work. The findings suggest that the ongoing evolution of the IA system has continued to improve its procedural, substantive and transactive effectiveness; therefore, suggesting that continuing evolution is sufficient to deliver these dimensions of effectiveness. However, the findings also indicate that it is the people in the IA system that influence practice and arbitrate legitimacy. Developing the system over time has not significantly improved legitimacy, leading to the conclusion that gaining legitimacy in the IA process might need some elements of revolution.

show abstract

“…EIA as policy tools also empowers the government to prosecute environmental offences in the law courts. However, experience with EIA has shown that government institutions in both industrialised and developing countries often lack the capacity to evaluate the quality of the assessments and are facing challenges in monitoring and enforcement (Morrison-Saunders et al 2012;Zvijakova et al 2014;Chanchitpricha and Bond 2018;Hacon et al 2018).…”

Section: Impact Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health impact assessment for promoting sustainable development: the HIA4SD project

Winkler

Adongo

Binka

et al. 2019

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health is central to sustainable development, and thus a cross-cutting issue of the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2030 agenda. Natural resource extraction projects in Africa have considerable potential to impact on health-related targets of the SDGs. This paper introduces the rationale and organization of the HIA4SD Project; a 6-year research for development (r4d) project that aims to inform and facilitate a policy dialogue at the national and international level on whether current regulatory approaches to impact assessment in Africa promote sustainable development, placing emphasis on SDG3 Good Health and Well-being. The HIA4SD Project has a focus on large-scale natural resource extraction projects and is implemented in four African countries, namely Burkina Faso, Ghana, Mozambique and Tanzania.

show abstract

Investigating the effectiveness of mandatory integration of health impact assessment within environmental impact assessment (EIA): a case study of Thailand

Cited by 18 publications

References 30 publications

Framework for Participatory Quantitative Health Impact Assessment in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Framework for Participatory Quantitative Health Impact Assessment in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Evolution or revolution? Reflecting on IA effectiveness in Thailand

Health impact assessment for promoting sustainable development: the HIA4SD project

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About