ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL RESEARCH COUNCIL REFERENCE NUMBER TITLE INVESTIGATORS INSTITUTION

Transcription

1 ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL RESEARCH COUNCIL POLARIS HOUSE NORTH STAR AVENUE SWINDON SN2 1UJ Tel: Fax: GTN 1434 REFERENCE NUMBER RES TITLE Mediating Consultation: Private Sector Consultancies Engagement in Local Air Quality Management Consultation INVESTIGATORS Prof Jim Longhurst (Principal Investigator); Dr Emma Weitkamp and Dr Nurul Leksmono (Co-applicants) INSTITUTION University of the West of England, Bristol This is the End of Award Report Form for the Impact Grants Scheme and should not be used for any other ESRC funding scheme. The form should be completed and returned to: Lesley Lilley, Senior Policy Manager, Knowledge Transfer, at the ESRC on or before the due date. Please note that the Report can only be accepted if all sections have been completed in full, and all award-holders have signed the declaration at the end. A copy of the complete Report, comprising this form and the project report, should be formatted as a single document and sent as an attachment to Lesley.lilley@esrc.ac.uk. 1

2 IMPACT GRANTS: CONCLUSION REPORT GUIDELINES The Impact Grants Scheme allows researchers to undertake new and additional knowledge transfer activities that are likely to have an impact on policy or practice. ESRC is committed to ensure that Knowledge Transfer activities on the research it funds are efficiently and effectively maximised. As such feedback from award holders is required to ensure that the outcomes of, and value added by, the awards can be monitored. Please note: the formal ESRC end of award evaluation process does not apply to Impact Grants, however, you are asked to report on your Impact Grant in no more than 800-1,000 words bearing in mind the scheme's objectives. Your report should be structured to take account of the form following these guidelines and should include the following: 1. Details of the award 2. Aims and Objectives of the activities undertaken and the extent to which they were met 3. Details of the activities undertaken 4. Major impacts generated and the means by which this was achieved. (Attention should be given to user engagement). 5. Were there any problems encountered and how were they resolved 2

3 PROJECT DETAILS ESRC END OF AWARD REPORT: PROJECT DETAILS AWARD NUMBER: AWARD TITLE: RES Mediating consultation: private sector consultancies engagement in Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) consultation TITLE OF EXISTING ESRC AWARD (IF RELEVANT) AWARD START DATE AWARD END DATE N/A 03/09/ /07/2008 TOTAL AMOUNT EXPENDED: 21, AWARD HOLDER(S): NB. This must include anyone named as a co-applicant, as originally listed in the research proposal. TITLE INITIALS SURNAME DATE OF BIRTH No HOURS PER WEEK/ % TIME ON PROJECT Prof J.W.S Longhurst 25/02/1958 2hrs Dr E.L.C Weitkamp 30/12/1964 1hrs Dr N.S Leksmono 11/09/1975 4hrs PRINCIPAL AWARD HOLDER'S FULL OFFICIAL ADDRESS (please list other addresses on a separate sheet if necessary) Prof James Longhurst Faculty of Environment & Technology University of the West of England, Frenchay Campus, Coldharbour Lane, Bristol, BS16 1QY, U.K. James.Longhurst@uwe.ac.uk FAX NUMBER 44 (0) TELEPHONE NUMBER 44 (0) Mobile 44 (0)

4 1. REPORT OF ACTIVITIES An 800-1,000 word (maximum) report on your Impact Grant, in non-technical language, should be provided below. The summary might be used by ESRC to publicise the project and its achievements. It should cover the aims and objectives of the activities undertaken, details of the activities undertaken including potential or actual impacts on policy and practice. You should state whether the original aims and objectives were met. The aims of the research were: a. To provide a better understanding of the services provided by environmental consultancies, with a particular focus on the role of consultants in discharging the statutory consultation functions of local authorities in respect of Local Air Quality Management (LAQM); b. To audit the uptake of the findings of an ESRC Science in Society funded research project by the Environmental Consultancy (EC) sector; c. To identify strategies to improve its uptake and enhance the relevance of ESRCfunded research to the EC sector. Objectives: a. To deliver the first audit of services offered by ECs acting as an intermediary between local authorities and stakeholders involved in LAQM; b. To produce a supplementary guidance document which reflects the specific needs of ECs interfacing with local authorities; c. To assess and increase ECs engagement with the Steps to Better Practice Guidance for Local Authorities on Local Air Quality Management Consultation (STBP) guidance document produced from ESRC project (RES ). The target audience of our previous ESRC funded research was Local Authorities (LAs) and the STBP guidance document was one of the major research outcomes of the project. The guidance document was advertised to 353 English LAs by ing the web link to LA contacts and publicising the guidance and its importance at relevant air quality forums for LAs and to relevant government and Devolved Administrations bodies. This Impact Grant sought to widen the uptake of the guidance document to 150 ECs which according to their literature offered or appeared to offer public or stakeholder engagement services in air quality and/or environmental consultation. EC activities were explored in two specific areas: public and stakeholder consultation in LAQM and for the air quality aspects of Environmental Impact Assessment. The remit of our research was widened because initial research indicated ECs interpreted the term LAQM consultation narrowly. Following an audit of EC service provision, a questionnaire survey was distributed to 150 UK ECs that indicated or implied in their promotional materials (marketing literature, websites) that they offered services in public and stakeholder consultation work in one of the following fields: air pollution/air quality, environmental impact assessment/strategic environmental assessment or corporate environmental strategy. A 33 % response rate was achieved, consisting of 27 questionnaire responses and 22 responses stating no current involvement in public and stakeholder consultation in these areas. Therefore, we have a sample population of 50 of the original 150 organisations contacted on the basis of promotional material. The questionnaire survey has revealed a relatively small number of ECs specialising in 4

5 public and stakeholder consultation and air quality. Although they advertised capability as part of their comprehensive service offering, consultation is not a focus of service undertaken by the market leading ECs. Surprisingly half of the surveyed ECs were aware of and knew how to access the STBP guidance. However there is still scope for further dissemination. Nine respondents were willing to participate in further research. Having assessed the geographical distribution, changes were made to both the locations and number of focus groups (two focus groups were held, one each in Bristol and London). Eight confirmed attendance but work commitments prevented two participants from attending. Focus groups were designed as interaction and knowledge transfer events to share the ESRC research findings and participants practical experiences in undertaking air quality related consultation. The outcomes from the focus group and the questionnaire survey were used to formulate supplementary guidance for the EC sector. Reflecting upon the outcomes, we doubled the number of case studies from the original two to four. The questionnaire, focus groups and case studies led us to formulate some conclusions from this work. ECs use a commercial model to organise and deliver their services. In this model, clear outcomes and closure are identified with clear aims and objectives being set. In contrast, local authority approaches to undertaking consultation for LAQM are characterised by regulatory compliance and a tick box mentality focusing on the process that complies with statutory requirements. In the best situations, this difference in outlook and focus could be beneficial with partners responsible for different aspects of the consultation, thereby ensuring that both outcomes and process receive attention and closure is achieved. However, an alternate scenario is also possible, whereby the client (LA) focuses on the process without attending to the outcomes achieved by the EC. For participants in such consultation processes, this could lead to feelings of disenfranchisement and disempowerment because the consultation is seen more as an exercise to be completed (i.e. to tick the box) rather than a means of engaging with the participants and involving them in decisions relating to LAQM. This links to the issue identified in STBP that participants in consultation may be unclear about their role and influence in the process. The research has led to the formulation of a supplementary guidance document which should assist ECs in discharging stakeholder and public consultation on behalf of local authorities. The supplementary guidance will be available on the website ( Its availability will be communicated to all 150 ECs originally contacted in the audit phase of this research. On the basis of this work, we conclude that all of the aims and objectives set have been achieved. 5

6 2. DISSEMINATION A. Please outline what has been done to date. B. Please outline any specific plans you have for further publication and/or other means of dissemination of the outcomes and results of the project. A. Dissemination: Questionnaire findings were presented: E.L.C. Weitkamp, N.S. Leksmono, J.W.S. Longhurst, Mediating consultation: private sector consultancies engagement in air quality consultation. In 10 th Annual Public Communication of Science and Technology Conference. Malmö, Sweden June A website ( was developed for the project and linked to the previous ESRC research website ( on consultation and local air quality management with optimised search terms. We continue to maintain both websites. Research outcomes i.e. questionnaire, focus group and interview results are available on the website and were distributed to environmental consultancies. A contact database of environmental consultancies has also been constructed. We have communicated the project to the consultancies and alerted them to the Steps to Better Practice guidance formulated as part of a previous ESRC grant. As a result, there has been an increase in the uptake of the findings of our previous ESRC funded research project by the commercial sector and has increased relevant organisations interest in and awareness of the project. Elements of this research are presented in: J.W.S. Longhurst, Consultation for air quality management in England: an analysis of local authority interaction with its stakeholders. In 2008 British Association Science Communication Conference. London, United Kingdom May N.S. Leksmono, P. Dorfman, E.T. Hayes, J.W.S. Longhurst, E.L.C. Weitkamp, Recommendations for better practice to address issues and challenges in consulting stakeholders and the public on local air quality management. In 14 th International Union of Air Pollution Prevention and Environmental Protection Associations. Brisbane, Australia 9-13 September B. Specific plans for further publication and dissemination: N.S. Leksmono, T.J. Chatterton, E.T. Hayes, J.W.S. Longhurst, E.L.C. Weitkamp. Stepping up to consultation: applying lessons from local air quality management to climate change. Submitted to Better Air Quality Conference Bangkok, Thailand November N.S. Leksmono, J.W.S. Longhurst, E.T. Hayes, E.L.C. Weitkamp. Managing consultation processes for air and environmental management in municipalities. To be submitted to 17 th International Conference on Modelling, Monitoring and Management of Air Pollution. Tallinn, Estonia July N.S. Leksmono, J.W.S. Longhurst, E.L.C. Weitkamp. Exploring the contribution of environmental consultancies to consultation in local decision-making. To be submitted to Journal of Environmental Management. A supplementary guidance document for environmental consultancies interfacing with local authorities will be available at the research website. An will be sent 6

7 to the 150 EC offering consultation or public engagement services in air pollution/air quality, environmental impact assessment/strategic environmental assessment or corporate environmental strategy. C Please provide names and contact details of any non-academic research users (i) who were involved in shaping the project and (ii) with whom the project has been discussed and/or to whom results have been disseminated. (i) Those who are particularly engaged with and contributed to the project: Dr Mark Broomfield Technical Director, Enviros Consulting Ltd Enviros House, Sitka Drive, Shrewsbury, SY2 6LG Tel: Mark.Broomfield@enviros.com Ms Jessica Lenham Air Quality Consultant, Mouchel Bridge House, Oyster Lane Byfleet, Surrey, KT14 7JQ Tel: Jessica.Lenham@mouchel.com Dr Richard Maggs Business Director Air Quality, Bureau Veritas UK Ltd Great Guildford House, 30 Great Guildford Street London, SE1 0ES Tel: Richard.Maggs@uk.bureauveritas.com Dr Nick Davey Director, Entran Ltd Eden Lodge Studios, Eden Office Park Chapel Pill Lane, Ham Green Bristol, BS20 0BX Tel: nickdavey@entranltd.co.uk (ii) The project has been communicated to 150 EC offering relevant services and the research outcomes have been made available on the research website. The links to specific outputs have been disseminated to this community. When the guidance is completed, further communication will be conducted with relevant ECs. 7

8 3. MAJOR CHALLENGES Please detail below any major challenges encountered during your research and comment on any consequent impact on the project. You should include any advice you might have for resolving such problems in future projects and any lessons learned. In general we experienced difficulties in engaging with this sector. This is a commercial sector with limited discretionary time to participate in research which is not fee earning. The initial questionnaire response rate was less than 10%. The number of follow-up phone calls and s was higher than in the previous research with a non-commercial sector (local authorities). In focus groups and case study interviews, potential participants gave short notice of cancellations. In order to meet the research timescale, we had to be flexible, changing methods to adapt to the varying needs of the research participants. 4. IMPACT ASSESSMENT Please describe any outcomes of your research, beneficial or otherwise that were not expected at the outset or other issues which were important to the research, where these are not addressed above. This research has identified both potential and actual EC that engage in public and stakeholder consultation for air quality and environment, and most importantly EC who engage with local authorities. We have engaged a commercial sector with former and current research funded by ESRC, and pursued a programme of enquiries related to research participants needs which will contribute to the supplementary guidance for EC on public and stakeholder consultation relating to air quality and the environment. We have also developed a research website which will host the supplementary guidance document. 5. OTHER ISSUES AND UNEXPECTED OUTCOMES Please describe any outcomes of your research, beneficial or otherwise that were not expected at the outset or other issues which were important to the research, where these are not addressed above. In principle, ECs show great willingness and desire to participate in original research but other work commitments and timescale restrict their abilities to put good intentions into practice. Furthermore, EC frontline reception staff act as gatekeepers to fee earning consultants and it is these staff who enable or disable direct communication with consultants and who often made the decision to decline participation in the research. However, when fee paying consultants were approached directly they were willing to participate in this work. There is clear evidence from the audit that ECs offer services in public and stakeholder consultation but many were in fact not currently engaged in such work. A number of models of consultancy operation are suggested by this work: a) the small niche provider, b) the medium sized generalist, and c) the large comprehensive 8

9 multinational. Some niche providers specialise in public and stakeholder consultation and are subcontracted by larger agencies on an as-needed basis. Medium sized ECs offer a wide-range of services but may subcontract the public and stakeholder consultation to small niche providers. Large, comprehensive multinationals attempt to hold all services in-house but may at times subcontract. Medium and large scale ECs retain managerial and client reporting responsibility. These models suggest that future work may usefully be directed at understanding the organisational structure of ECs and the drivers for and barriers to engagement with research within these models. The paucity of niche providers on the sample suggests the need to explore their uptake of and engagement with research. A tentative conclusion is that in the area of air quality consultation ECs in practice are offering facilitation rather than communication services. 9

10