Why tackling inequality in the current financial situation remains important

Two different views and researches on the importance of cohesion and reducing inequalities. A study conducted by NCoC in partnership with other organisations, explores the relationship between civic engagement and economic resilience. It finds that the density and type of nonprofit organizations in a community, as well as its social cohesion, are important predictors of that community’s ability to withstand unemployment in a recession. The study identifies two main types of civic health that seem to matter most. One is the role of nonprofit organizations. The number of nonprofits per capita and the degree to which they directly engage local residents are both related to the unemployment rate. The other factor is social cohesion: interacting with friends and neighbors. Each type of civic engagement is separately valuable for preventing unemployment increases.

Nobel Prize winner and previous World Bank chief economist, Prof. Joseph Stiglitz was interviewed by the  German weekly The Spiegel on the raising inequality in the United States:  "the American dream has become a myth. The life chances of a young US citizen are more dependent on the income and education of his parents than in any other advanced industrial country for which there is data. The belief in the American dream is reinforced by anecdotes, by dramatic examples of individuals who have made it from the bottom to the top -- but what matters most are an individual's life chances. The belief in the American dream is not supported by the data." In June, Stilglitz published a book on the same topic "The price of inequality: how today's divided society endangers our future". Stiglitz focus on the financial and econonimical aspects leading to inequality, but he uses several health examples in his book. 

Consultation and cooperation with Indigenous People

Health Impact Assessment is always concerned with community involvement and participation. And many practitioners can agree that ”community participation is intuitively appealing but practically difficult (Parry and Wright 2003).
Even more so when one deals with indigenous people. I had an interesting exchange on this with some colleagues dealing with Social Impact Assessment in Greenland. They were surprised that “experts” and “companies” did not realize that Greenlandic population might be Inuit and inhabit the arctic, but it does not mean that they share the same culture of Canadians and Americans or Russians Inuits
The right of local communities and indigenous people to make informed and voluntary decisions about the transformation happening in their local environments should be the essence of Impact Assessment. There is a recent article written by Paul Klein summarizing some ideas to help corporations have better, more inclusive relationships with indigenous people and communities. And mainly:
1. Spend time learning the history and culture of local indigenous people with the goal of building relationships and trust.
2. Acknowledge the right of indigenous people to informed consent; engage third party experts, chosen in consultation with affected communities, to assess and verify local conditions.
3. Ensure communities have timely access to all relevant information about any proposal affecting indigenous territories and offer resources in formats that are culturally appropriate, available in indigenous languages, and easy to understand.
4. Recognize that indigenous people are seeking the same community goals as corporations: better education, more employment and improved economic opportunities.
5. Understand that indigenous people look at time horizons and development differently and that actions taken must benefit future generations.
6. Remember that there are unique rights that are protected and advanced by indigenous people. Indigenous people have a stewardship relationship with the land; they support development but they must also care for the land.
7. Be realistic. It takes time for communities to respond to employment and business opportunities that are presented by extraction projects. Mining companies need to spend time working with communities to understand and act on those opportunities well in advance of the approval stages.
8. Establish co-management and co-responsibility. Accountability begins with shared responsibility for targets and outcomes.
9. Support local economic development. During the course of a mine’s operations, indigenous communities need to diversify and develop their own economies so that once the mine leaves, there are sustainable gains.
10. Ensure that the community has a consent process in place prior to initiating environmental and social impact assessments.
To the above some readers have added:
11. No two indigenous communities should be considered the same (which caught my attentions about the discussion on Greenland).
12. The right to say no to the proposed development

Do you have any other ideas or recommendations to add?

Is less more? Creating an HIA community of practice online

A terrific guest post from Liz Green, Principal Health Impact Assessment Development Officer at the Wales Health Impact Assessment Support Unit.

Having read Ben’s posting regarding a more sophisticated use of social media for health impact assessment it struck a chord with me – particularly what Ben’s comments about passive online engagement – and made me think about the subject more.

As someone who actively updates a website and sends out e-updates and newsletters to a number of communities, organisations, networks, practitioners and policy makers I found what Ben said interesting.  The Wales Health Impact Assessment Support Unit (WHIASU) does not have a specific comments section on its website but as the administrator I rarely get feedback – positive or negative.  Yet we know from statistical figures we obtain each month, that 1,000’s of people browse and actively download information, research evidence and HIA Reports from the site each month.  So why is it so hard to get a better sense of the HIA community and to generate networking through social media?

Personally, I think the answer to this question may be found in identifying the barriers to the current use of social media and I have listed them in no particular order:

• Lack of time to contribute or the intention to post later and then not doing it.
• Personal information overload.   Posting on your own Facebook pages etc can be demanding enough (I’ve given up on it now – all that updating, replying, friending and defriending) without having to do it for ‘work’ – unless, of course it is built into your job description and are therefore committed to doing it. 
• Work information overload. HIA forms just a small component of many public health/health improvement/environmental practitioners’ job roles and they may be on several different competing contact lists and networks, health and non-health related – each having websites, sending out mail and updates and but do people really read them?  Are we bombarded now?  How many people honestly just press delete or only skim them because they get so many?  They may only have time to browse other more relevant media for their current work streams.  
• We need to consider that some people are just not technologically savvy on emerging media like Twitter and this could form a barrier.
• Posting and commenting can be seen as a small ‘club’  of a few expert practitioners who post and are highly active and know each other – and dare I say it - men? This can be off putting.
• And this brings me to my final thought - I think the most important barrier to moving the use of social media is FEAR and lack of confidence.  People fear appearing to ask silly questions and/or replying to posts and being dismissed for it by others.  On the one hand, the internet can be a very private place to hide in but on the other, posting a comment into the unknown leaves people very exposed on a global level. If we consider this at the extreme then it could be true to say that professional reputations could be shattered with the press of a button.  The emergence of ‘Trolling’ has also made many sensitive to this.  On Facebook people do know each other and although they may have friends of friends etc it is still seen as a relatively ‘safe’ environment to contribute to.  The very term ‘friend’ makes it appear this way and people like personal interaction and have some semblance of control over their network. In Wales, I am known personally by most of the Public Health and HIA policy makers and practitioners (and many more people know of me) and whenever I send out an e-update I get lots of private replies back.  Even if I state others should be emailed in the first instance.  People know me and they know that they can ask me anything and I will not think that they are silly or stupid or don’t have a clue or whatever. I posted on a network site last week and came into work today to find the person whose post I had replied to had found my work email address and emailed me directly and was asking for lots of info and could I send it to him privately. It is a classic example.

I’m not sure what the answer to Ben’s question is.  In a small country like Wales, we may or may not be able to mobilise a community of practitioners who interact with each other in a more interactive way so it may be unrealistic to assume that it can be done on a global level.  Perhaps, we should be satisfied by the level of social media we have now and the few people who do post?  It may be unrealistic to expect more sophisticated levels at least in the short term.  Anonymity may help but then no-one knows who to approach for assistance, the credibility of the poster and the background to what is being said.

I’m beginning to think that perhaps ‘less is more’ and to just focus on being ‘on trend’ – targeting the most fashionable and usable media at any given time and that as trends come and go the focus will change.  The approach will be a much more fluid and flexible.

WHIASU aims to launch a forum on the WHIASU website this year.  However, we aim to utilise it in an active way – as a ‘drop in’ site discussing relevant pre posted issues for a 2 hour window.  I did one last year with a National Welsh Housing Organisation – and it worked quite well – once I got over the time lag and the queue building up of questions to answer.  It will be interesting to see what kind of response we get.