IRELAND
Ireland
1. General description of the extent to which and how the social
impact of policy proposals is assessed in your country
To what extent is the social impact of policy proposals in your country assessed? Is this
done routinely (formalised) as part of the policy process (e.g. in the context of an
integrated or specific ex ante impact assessment system) or more ad hoc? Is the
assessment of social impacts mandatory or is it done on a voluntary basis? Which policy
proposals are being assessed (please also consider policy proposals which would not
normally be characterised as “social policy”)?
There is no explicit tradition of social impact assessment in Irish public policymaking. Rather, a
number of discrete ‘impact assessments’ are carried out on specific issues: poverty, gender,
rural, employment and disability. These sectoral impact assessments (IAs) apply to official
government policies, such as memoranda for government, statements of strategy, Estimates and
annual Budget, the National Development Plan, EU plans and programmes, and legislation. In
practice, the most formal requirement for impact assessments relates to memoranda for
government, with the procedures for impact assessment being set out in the Cabinet Handbook.
A second tier of IAs in the policymaking process is primarily voluntary and experimental, and
usually involves external partners. These IAs are carried out in policy areas which are not core to
government decision-making. These IAs mainly occur in statutory service providers and local
authorities.
What is understood by social impact(s)? Is it defined in any official guidance?
As noted, there is no official reference to social IA. Rather, each type of IA has is own definitions
and procedures. One example is ‘poverty impact assessment’, which is defined as
the process by which government departments, local authorities and State Agencies
assess policies and programmes at design, implementation and review stages in
relation to the likely impact that they will have or have had on poverty and on
inequalities which are likely to lead to poverty, with a view to poverty reduction.
Poverty IA was introduced in 1998 under the National Anti-Poverty Strategy. Since then, poverty
IA has become a requirement for all substantive memoranda for government. Official guidelines
are provided for government departments conducting a poverty IA. These are updated
periodically in order to promote best practice. Other supports, such as training programmes and
networking events are also provided. (See http://www.socialinclusion.ie/pia.html for more details.)
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
1
IRELAND
Another example of a form of IA is health impact assessment. This is defined as
a combination of procedures, methods and tools by which a policy, programme or
project may be judged as to its potential effects on the health of a population and the
distribution of those effects within the population.1
The procedures, methods and tools that are used in health IA include policy analysis,
demography, collation and analysis of evidence of health impacts, quantitative and qualitative
research, and community consultation. Health IA attempts to draw these elements together to
enable a systematic identification of health impacts. Health IA focuses in particular on the
reduction of health inequalities.
In Ireland, health IA has been extensively promoted by the Institute for Public Health in Ireland,
which is a government-funded body which operates in Ireland and Northern Ireland. However, the
adoption of health IA is entirely voluntary and is not part of government policymaking. Guidelines
for health IA are provided, as is ongoing training and networking events. There is also an
extensive website in support of health IA. (See http://www.publichealth.ie/hia for details).
To what extent is social impact assessment a closed or an open process? (transparency,
involvement of stakeholders through public consultation, publication of results).
The forms of IA which relate to Government decisions are a closed process, as they are subject
to the requirements of Cabinet confidentiality. As a result, not only is there no stakeholder
engagement in the process, but the outcomes of the IAs generally are not published.
One example of a published ‘Government’ IA is that on the distributive and poverty impact of the
tax/welfare measures in the annual Budget. This is only made public after the Budget. Both the
Department of Finance and the Department of Social Protection publish their separate analyses
of the poverty impact of tax and welfare policies. In 2011, for the first time, the Department of
Social Protection published an impact assessment of both tax and welfare components of
budgetary policy.
Some departments and state bodies have undertaken and published poverty IAs outside of the
formal government policymaking process (eg as part of policy reviews). There is more scope for
stakeholder engagement on these. Other IAs, such as health IA, are an open process, with a
strong emphasis on stakeholder engagement through interviews, focus groups and workshops.
How do you evaluate the impact of SIAs? Is there any evidence that they have improved
(or even affected) the policymaking process?
It has proven difficult to evaluate the impact of IAs, due to the dearth of public information on IAs
within government policymaking. Generally, there is little evidence that IAs influence the
1
This definition is known as the Gothenburg Consensus and was developed by a group of HIA practitioners in
1999. The Gothenburg Consensus Paper outlines the main concepts and suggested approach to HIA and is
identified as a first step to creating a common understanding of HIA.
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
2
IRELAND
policymaking process. An independent review of poverty IA was carried out by the National
Economic and Social Council in 2001.2 This found
A high level of compliance at a formal level with the requirement that significant policy
proposals to Cabinet be poverty IA. This, however, does not necessarily indicate rigorous
poverty impact assessment. There is little direct evidence that the process has seriously
influenced the policy formation process and none that it has altered the distribution of
resources.
One objective of poverty IA is to sensitise individuals involved in policy formulation to the
objective to reduce poverty and inequalities with a view to poverty reduction. The conclusion
is that this objective has been largely achieved; the process has been largely successful in
creating a climate of awareness of the impact of major policy proposals on poverty.
The other key objective of poverty IA is policy impact assessment. Reforms are required if the
policy impact assessment objective is to be achieved. "First level" proofing of all proposals
should be adequately resourced and the practice of selective in-depth policy impact
assessment should be initiated by a central specialised unit with expertise in impact
assessment.
A report of the application of poverty IA to the National Development Plan 2000-2006 was carried
out by the Combat Poverty Agency and the Office for Social Inclusion in 2006.3 4 The report
states that application of poverty impact assessment to the National Development Plan can be
seen to provide a tool through which to assess whether and to what extent the National
Development Plan has made an impact on social inclusion.
2. General description of the capacity for social impact
assessment
In developing capacity for social impact assessment, one can choose, broadly, between
developing capacity within public administration (institutional embedding) or outsourcing
to research centres and academic institutions. Please briefly describe the options that
have been chosen in your country and the underlying rationale.
The main specialists in IA exist outside of government, either in specialist state agencies or in
independent research centres. The outsourcing in part reflects the generalist nature of the Irish
civil service. While civil servants receive training in IA and are able to apply IA, they are not
specialists in this work. In part, it also reflects the existence of statutory centres of expertise on
specific policy areas outside of government, such as poverty, disability, health, etc.
Another issue to be considered is the difficulties in developing analytic tools and data sources for
IA. These often require the investment of significant resources. One example of such an
approach is the development of the SWITCH tax./welfare micro-simulation model by the
independent Economic and Social Research Institute. This model allows for a full analysis of the
distributive and poverty impact of tax and welfare policies, based on the EU Survey on Income
2
3
4
Available at http://files.nesc.ie/nesc_reports/en/NESC_106_2001.pdf
Combat Poverty Agency and the Office for Social Inclusion were integrated to become the Social Inclusion
Division in the department of Social Protection in 2009.
Available at http://www.cpa.ie/publications/PovertyImpactAssessmentInTheNDP_2006.pdf
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
3
IRELAND
and Living Conditions. The ESRI undertakes the development and maintenance of the tax-benefit
model and provides training/support for its use in key government departments.
Where social impact assessments are outsourced, briefly discuss the relationship
between the external research centres (or other bodies carrying out the SIA) and the
commissioning government departments. Is there a tension between academic freedom
and political responsibility?
In relation to the example of the SWITCH model above, the ESRI is free to use the model and
publish results – and does so, including prompt analysis of distributional impact of the budget.
Government departments use the model for ex ante analysis and are also free to publish. This
approach helps resolve potential tensions and ensure a flow of information to inform policy
debate. In other cases, where ownership and publication rests with the commissioning
department, then some issues can arise.
To what extent is there a long term strategy aimed at developing expertise/ human
resources, methods, tools and databases?
It is hard to discern a coherent long-term strategy aimed at developing expertise/human
resources, methods, tools and databases. Another challenge can be securing the long-term
funding required to develop capacity and expertise. However, there are some important
developments, such as an enhanced focus on administrative data as a source for official
statistics. For example, census data are now used routinely to identify areas of disadvantage and
to track change over time.
3. Strengths and weaknesses of the capacity for social impact
assessment
Please describe briefly the strengths and weaknesses of the capacity for social impact
assessment in your country. Consider separately a) human resources (experts researchers), b) methods and tools and c) data sources.
As noted earlier, there is no tradition of employing research expertise within central government.
Generally, such expertise is located in research centres, universities, the private sector or state
bodies. A number of reports (eg NESC, CPA/OSI) have report suggested that a central or
specialist unit should be established to undertake in-depth poverty assessment and to support
frontline assessments. The need for training is also highlighted.
Methods and tools have been developed to some extent. The SWITCH model is the best
example. Innovative ways to consult with people have also been developed. However, more
could be done to identify and make accessible appropriate methods and tools.
Perhaps the biggest weakness facing IA is lack of data, especially quantitative data for monitoring
purposes. This is linked to the development of agreed indicators, especially outcome indicators.
Other issues highlighted include:
guidelines;
transparency;
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
4
IRELAND
institutional supports;
and integrated assessments.
identifies a number of lessons in regard to enhancing poverty IA, the importance of monitoring
and evaluation, and the extent and nature of resources required.
4. Please, provide examples to illustrate the use of methodologies,
tools and data sources in your country that could be presented /
examined during the Peer Review.
Could you provide us with a short description of some (approx. 3/5) ex ante social impact
assessment cases that can illustrate the use of tools, methodologies and data sources?
For illustrative purposes you will find an overview of integrated impact assessment cases that
have been examined in the context of the study on SIA in the Member States (see footnote 22 in
the Host Country Note) classified according to these three variables in Annex 2 of the feedback
questionnaire.
5. Key issues for discussion
Please indicate which key issues (related to methodology, tools and data sources for ex
ante social impact assessment) you consider most useful to discuss during the Peer
Review.
The development of agreed indicators and supporting data sources is a critical issue. The
definition of poverty and how to measure it must be operationalised in a way that is usable by
officials carrying out all levels of poverty IA. Data deficiencies must be addressed if evidencebased decision making, including poverty IA, is to become a reality. The identification of
indicators by which achievement can be measured and progress audited is essential to a
successful process of impact assessment. The government review of the national poverty target
currently underway presents an opportunity to address these issues.
Tools to support and facilitate stakeholder consultation are also necessary, especially to giving
meaning to the aspiration ‘the involvement of people experiencing poverty’. Government officials
find it difficult to engage with the beneficiaries/recipients of policies and their engagement is often
mediated by representative organisations and elected officials. The potential of new technologies
to facilitate stakeholder engagement could be usefully explored.
Finally, where we have good tools, as in micro-simulation, we are obliged to find ways to enable
non-expert actors, whether government officials or stakeholders, to better understand and use
these tools and to better communicate their results to a wider audience.
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
5
IRELAND
Annex 1: Social impact assessment case studies
Six examples of social impact studies are outlined below.
Two relate to the distributive effects of national budgetary/financial measures affecting the total
population. Both reflect current austerity initiatives.
Tax/welfare measures in the annual Budget, characterised by need for major financial
adjustments to reduce govt expenditure and increase exchequer revenue;
Introduction of a carbon tax, with possibility of compensatory measures.
One example relates to the revision of housing standards and regulations in the private rented
sector. This is a traditionally weak and unregulated housing sector, with a large segment of
welfare-dependent households in receipt of rent supplement.
Two examples relate to local housing policy and are relevant to the specific situation of groups
with a high risk of poverty and are thus relevant to the National Action Plan for Social Inclusion.
Rental scheme for local authority tenants;
Temporary accommodation for Travellers.
The final example looks at local socio-economic planning and development and how this may
impact on poverty target groups in the local population.
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
6
IRELAND
Country: Ireland
Short description of the policy area / context, the issue under consideration, the proposal
that was assessed.
Budgetary tax/welfare policy.
The exact policy question to be answered.
Distributive and poverty impact of tax/welfare measures for annual Budget
The timeframe for providing the answer.
In months preceding the annual Budget.
The decision taken on how to do the analysis.
This analysis is undertaken in compliance with requirement to conduct poverty impact
assessment of annual Budget. The SWITCH tax/welfare micro-simulation model is used for the
analysis. Relevant departments have access to the model and are provided with technical
support by an external research body.
The type of impact(s) examined.
The impact of tax and welfare changes for households distinguished by income and by
composition. Also the impact on households falling below relative income poverty thresholds.
Methodologies – tools – databases used.
Micro-simulation model based on representative sample of households taken from the EU Survey
on Income and Living Conditions (2008).
Any examples followed (source of inspiration)?
Tax/welfare models are widely used by developed countries.
Resources availability / constraints (general).
The SWITCH model is developed by an independent research organisation, the Economic and
Social Research Institute, which employs a number of economists. The model is supported
financially by the Department of Finance and the Department of Social Protection. Access to the
model and training and support to operate it are provided to government departments.
Evaluation: pros and cons of the use of methods, tools and data sources in the case
examined.
The SWITCH model provides a comprehensive assessment of the impact of budgetary policy
based on a representative sample of the population. However, politicians and the media often
prefer illustrative examples to understand and communicate policy change.
Follow up: validation – ex post evaluation?
The findings are overseen by experts in the ESRI
Written material available:
Reports are published as part of budgetary documentation by the Department of Finance
(www.finance.ie ) and also by the Department of Social Protection (www.welfare.ie )
The analysis for Budget 2011, including tax and welfare measures, is available here:
http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Topics/Budget/Bud11/Pages/povertyanalysisbudget11.aspx
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
7
IRELAND
Country: Ireland
Short description of the policy area / context, the issue under consideration, the proposal
that was assessed.
Climate policy and environmental taxes
The exact policy question to be answered.
The distributional implications of a carbon tax
The timeframe for providing the answer.
2008
The decision taken on how to do the analysis.
The analysis was undertaken by the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI)
The type of impact(s) examined.
Impact on income distribution and household composition
impact of revenue recycling
Methodologies – tools – databases used.
Household budget survey
SWITCH tax/welfare model
Any examples followed (source of inspiration)?
Yes, drawn from economic literature.
Resources availability / constraints (general).
Considerable expertise in ESRI. Access to SWITCH model
Evaluation: pros and cons of the use of methods, tools and data sources in the case
examined.
No information
Follow up: validation – ex post evaluation?
Further research required on impact of carbon taxes on fuel poverty, on the range of effects
within deciles, the indirect effects of carbon taxes on income distribution, the general equilibrium
effects of carbon taxes on income distribution, and the effects of carbon taxes on economic
growth and hence income distribution.
Written material available:
http://www.esri.ie/UserFiles/publications/20080716090749/WP250.pdf
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
8
IRELAND
Country: Ireland
Short description of the policy area / context, the issue under consideration, the proposal
that was assessed.
Housing standards.
The exact policy question to be answered.
The impact of a revision of housing standards in the private rented sector.
The timeframe for providing the answer.
2008
The decision taken on how to do the analysis.
Department of the Environment and Local Government.
The type of impact(s) examined.
Accommodation choice, health, comfort and safety, rental costs
Methodologies – tools – databases used.
Consultation with stakeholders
Literature review
Qualitative assessment
Any examples followed (source of inspiration)?
No information.
Resources availability / constraints (general).
Analysis undertaken by Centre for Housing Research.
Evaluation: pros and cons of the use of methods, tools and data sources in the case
examined.
No information.
Follow up: validation – ex post evaluation?
No information.
Written material available:
The report is available on soft copy only.
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
9
IRELAND
Country: Ireland
Short description of the policy area / context, the issue under consideration, the proposal
that was assessed.
Housing income support
The exact policy question to be answered.
The poverty impact of the differential rents scheme of South Dublin County Council
The timeframe for providing the answer.
2003
The decision taken on how to do the analysis.
South Dublin County Council
The type of impact(s) examined.
Household incomes, poverty traps, rent arrears
Methodologies – tools – databases used.
Profile of council tenants
Quantitative (monetary) effects on sample households
Any examples followed (source of inspiration)?
No information
Resources availability / constraints (general).
The analysis was carried out by the social inclusion unit within the local authority.
Evaluation: pros and cons of the use of methods, tools and data sources in the case
examined.
No information
Follow up: validation – ex post evaluation?
No information
Written material available:
The report is available on soft copy only.
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
10
IRELAND
Country: Ireland
Short description of the policy area / context, the issue under consideration, the proposal
that was assessed.
Temporary accommodation provision for Travellers
The exact policy question to be answered.
The health effects for Travellers of living in temporary accommodation (‘halting sites’)5
The timeframe for providing the answer.
The study was over two years and looked at existing accommodation and at proposals for the
refurbishment of the accommodation
The decision taken on how to do the analysis.
The study was an initiative of the Galway Traveller Movement, a voluntary Traveller organisation.
They got an external consultancy to undertake the assessment. An advisory group consisting of
public officials and other interests was established.
The type of impact(s) examined.
Physical environment, employment and education, access to services, physical activity, social
capital, transport and health.
Methodologies – tools – databases used.
Scientific evidence based on a literature review
Profile of residents’ health
Stakeholder engagement
Qualitative assessment
Any examples followed (source of inspiration)?
General health IA methodology
Resources availability / constraints (general).
Funding was provided by an external body, the Combat Poverty Agency.
Evaluation: pros and cons of the use of methods, tools and data sources in the case
examined.
No information.
Follow up: validation – ex post evaluation?
Follow-up study proposed, but not clear if implemented.
Written material available:
The published report is available here:
http://www.publichealth.ie/files/file/Travellers%27%20Health%20Matters%20HIA.PDF
Also published from the study were a toolkit to assess conditions on Traveller sites and a brief
guide to planning & development issues specifically in relation to Traveller accommodation (see
http://www.publichealth.ie/ireland/completedhias )
5
Travellers are a minority ethnic group. A third live in temporary accommodation on halting sites, which provide
basic facilities.
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
11
IRELAND
Country: Ireland
Short description of the policy area / context, the issue under consideration, the proposal
that was assessed.
Local planning and development
The exact policy question to be answered.
The social and economic impact of the Tuam local area plan 2011-2017 (Tuam is a rural town, in
Co Galway)
The timeframe for providing the answer.
2009
The decision taken on how to do the analysis.
The analysis was undertaken by Galway County Council , one of four pilot poverty impact
assessments supported under a ’poverty impact assessment support programme for local
authorities’, funded by the government departments responsible for social inclusion and local
government.
The type of impact(s) examined.
Community development; culture and arts; social inclusion; access to services, social housing;
Traveller accommodation; employment ; and safety
Methodologies – tools – databases used.
Public consultation and consultation with target groups
Local socio-economic profile
Qualitative assessment
Any examples followed (source of inspiration)?
Pilot poverty impact assessments with Limerick County Council and Donegal County Council
Resources availability / constraints (general).
The assessment was undertaken by specialist ‘social inclusion units’ in the local authority. An
external consultant provided technical assistance for the assessment and produced a final report.
Evaluation: pros and cons of the use of methods, tools and data sources in the case
examined.
Robust consultation required, with appropriate consultation processes for communities affected
by poverty.
Follow up: validation – ex post evaluation?
A report on the poverty impact assessment programme (including the above example) concluded
that poverty impact assessment was a useful tool for local planning and policy, but would need to
be integrated into the formal planning process on a statutory basis. The report also identified key
lessons for future implementation of poverty impact assessment. .
Written material available:
The report on the poverty impact assessment support programme for local authorities will shortly
be published. An electronic copy is available from the Department of Social Protection.
17-18 November 2011
Peer Review
Developing effective ex-ante social impact
assessment, Belgium
12