Each year, the I2S team holds an annual Intentional Design Days where we consolidate and integrate our research findings from the previous year to identify emerging themes, nail key insights and pinpoint the next major research questions to address.
What emerged this year?
Social value, early engagement and moving ‘beyond acceptance’.
I2S Co-Founder and Director Professor Sara Bice shares her early thoughts on what ‘beyond acceptance’ is and why it’s time for major infrastructure to go there.
For decades now, impactful industries have enhanced their environmental, social and governance (ESG) behaviours to better address the non-technical aspects of their work. This has resulted in improved policy, regulation and guidelines for sustainability, stakeholder and community engagement, and social licence to operate.
These important advancements have driven better attention to community and environmental concerns. They have sparked improved community engagement and consultation practice. A focus on non-technical project impacts and benefits has also supported improved impact assessment practice, in fields ranging from environmental to social to cumulative.
The relatively rapid growth of ESG, CSR, sustainability and social measures is to be lauded and appreciated. It should also be reflected upon and critically engaged.
To what extent has mainstreaming these concerns led to stagnation in understanding and practice?
Are common approaches to these issues leading to what neo-institutionalists (my sociological homeslices) would call ‘structural inertia’; a situation that, in this context, cements rather rigid attention to reducing community outrage, preventing opposition, managing risks and earning social licence?
All of these efforts encourage project acceptance. And that’s a good thing, right?
Bear with me here: If we are bravely critical, it’s worthwhile considering whether and how a focus on non-technical project behaviours to achieve project acceptance might unintentionally or inadvertently stymie the capacity and dedication to create social value.
Wait. What?!
Let’s just consider for a moment: Through all the good efforts to improve actions towards communities, to work better with them to get projects across the line, on-time and on-budget, is it possible that we may have inadvertently taken our eye off the proverbial ball?
What is the real purpose of infrastructure investment and delivery?
Ultimately, to improve people’s lives. To make access easier, environments healthier and lifestyles and livelihoods better. To create social value. To sustain our children’s and grandchildren’s [insert exponential lineage] opportunities and wellbeing.
The perspectives and tools through which we currently manage and encourage project accpetance–ESG, social licence, risk management–make a huge difference in reducing friction, improving communities’ experiences of project delivery and getting projects done. But they do this largely through a focus on risk mitigation and prevention.
What would happen if we flipped the lens to focus less on ‘project delivery’ (I know this sounds crazy and a bit unrealistic, but I’m an academic so I’m allowed to go here) and instead focused on social value creation?
What would happen if we moved the infrastructure sector beyond acceptance?
It’s a question worth asking. And it’s one I’m going to spend a lot of time analysing and thinking about over summer (Yes, northern hemisphere friends, it’s summer in December down here. I know. It’s weird.). Because I know that we can do better. ESG, social licence, social risk management:
These have all laid vital foundations. And there is still important work to be done. I2S is leading quite a bit of it.
We also have a duty to look to the future, to improve, to ask what’s next?
For me, the shift from mitigation to creation is where it’s at.