edward andersson & simon burall, involve making the business case for public engagement picture...
TRANSCRIPT
Edward Andersson & Simon Burall, Involve
Making the business case
for public engagement
Pic
ture
CC
: So
me
right
s re
serv
ed B
y: m
conn
ors
“Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing.”
Oscar Wilde
Introduction
Pic
ture
CC
: So
me
right
s re
serv
ed B
y: m
conn
ors
• Registered Charity (nr. 1130568)• Focus: Public and stakeholder engagement• Works with: Central & local government.
Health organisations, NGOs and International Organisations•www.involve.org.uk
About
www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk 6
Sciencewise-Expert Resource Centre
Sciencewise Expert Resource Centre for Public Dialogue in Science and Technology (ERC)
Funded by the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS)
It aims to help policy makers commission and
use public dialogue to inform policy decisions in emerging areas of science and technology
Launched in 2008
To help improve policy-making in science and technology through the use of public dialogue and engagement
www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk
What public dialogue costs – in context
Nanodialogues project (2006) cost £240,000 and explored nanotechnology &upstream engagement over 26 months. Value of nano research in 2007 was estimated to be about $12 billion; and the value of nano-enabled products was estimated then to be around $50 billion
7
The scale of investment in dialogue projects is dwarfed by the scale of the policy fields that dialogue has influenced
www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk
What not doing public dialogue can cost
Overall, the costs of not doing public dialogue can far outweigh the costs of the dialogue. For example:
• public opposition can delay or entirely prevent continuing policy development, innovation and new technologies
• conflict and entrenched positions can result in the complete rejection of new technologies.
"If you think dialogue is expensive, try conflict”
8
Getting Started
Pic
ture
CC
: So
me
right
s re
serv
ed B
y: m
conn
ors
What we’ll cover
• Introduction • Questions and answers• Introducing the tool • Exercise • Plenary Disucssion
Examples of Engagement
• Science Policy Dialogue• Science Festival• Community Outreach• Community Jury • Co-creation of Research
Business Case
‘At the end of the day the most important question you need to tackle isn’t the ‘what’ but the ‘why’. You need to be able to articulate a compelling rationale for engagement that convinces your colleagues.’
Paul Younger -University of Newcastle
Research vs. Business caseResearch• Academic• Complete• Time consuming • Truth
Business case• Practical• Incomplete • As much time as
you have• Good enough
In short...
Understanding can be greatly enhanced but evidence will always be incomplete.
Plenary discussion
• Any questions?
• What are challenges of valuing engagement?
• What are benefits of valuing engagement?
Getting results
Pic
ture
CC
: So
me
right
s re
serv
ed B
y: m
conn
ors
Using the Involve Toolkit
Exercise
• In groups identify how you might value the costs and benefits of a particular engagement project using the tool.
• Ideally a ‘live’ project; however, it could also be a ‘dummy’ project.
Exercise
1. Define the focus and purpose2. Decide what to measure3. Complete the checklist and chart4. Analyse the results and ‘test’ with other
groups
Stage 1 - Scope the business case
• Decide how you will use the toolkit • Decide who your audiences are• Decide if monetary valuation is appropriate for
you
Costs that can be given a monetary value
Benefits that can be given a monetary value
Costs that cannot be expressed in monetary
terms
Benefits that cannot be expressed in monetary
terms
Stage 2 –Define focus and purpose
• Decide the focus for the business case• Clarify the intended purpose and outcomes• Consider possible comparator areas/ projects
Comparators
• Do nothing• Status Quo• Alternative engagement methods • Alternative means of achieving the benefits
Distributional impacts
• DEFRA and the Environment Agency (2005) estimated that around 5% of all permit applications took in excess of 500 hrs to process and 1% took over 1,000 hrs.
• Total Place Report (2010) found 200 to 300 ‘chaotic’ families in Croydon; each cost public services around £250,000 per year
Stage 3 -Decide what to measure
• Identify what can be given a money value and what can't
• Identify who you need help from to obtain the data
• Identify where proxies might be appropriate
Benefits • Innovation and creativity• Avoiding conflict• Access to new resources• Development/maintenance• Better quality outcomes• Information and expertise• Increased public awareness• Sharing responsibility• Increased use• Staff morale
Non-monetary benefits
• Revealed preference (What people do)
• Stated preference (What people say)
– Willingness to pay– Willingness to accept
• Benefits transfer (What other people measured)
• Replacement Costs (What people would do instead)
Benefits Transfer (Portsmouth)
• Bin fires in area: 2006: 154 2008: 135• Each case of criminal damage ~ £856 • 4.29 crimes unreported per reported case. • Potential saving of £69,772.56 per year• Also non monetary benefits: increased
volunteering, levels of satisfaction
Replacement costs New resource Replacement costIncreased volunteer time The cost of providing the
service or activity using paid staff
New intelligence and information
The cost of gathering the same information using a market research company
New and improved relationships
The cost of building the same links through a PR and communications exercise
Increased public awareness of policies and services
The cost of achieving a similar level of awareness through campaigns or PR
Stage 4 Complete checklist & chart
• Understand your data and assumptions• Gather the data you need • Fill in the checklist and calculation chart• Use spreadsheets to track costs and benefits
Benefits - Increase trustMonetary value Measured by Non-monetary valueReduced spend on complaints
Staff work diaries/time sheets, complaints listings
Reported trust levels, people reporting feeling able to influence decisions
Benefits - Take difficult decisions Monetary value Measured by Non-monetary valueReduced conflict and reduced spend on legal challenges
Legal costs, staff work diaries/time sheets, complaints listings
Number of negative articles in press, survey results
Stage 5 -Analyse results
• Try out different methods of analysis, for example SROI, Cost benefit, Cost-effectiveness
• Understand the limitations of the data• Test results with colleagues
Example -Probability
Environment Agency aimed to build ownership/trust in flood defence schemes:
• Flood mitigation benefit= £35-40 million • Engagement= £2 million • To be cost effective in future probability of
success must increase by 5.7% (£2 m/£35m). • Engagement needs to change the result from
rejection to acceptance in 1 case in 20 to be worthwhile.
Stage 6 -Present the business case
• Select appropriate presentation format• Present the business case• Adapt to feedback
Communicating the result
• Use the business case to tell stories• Tailor your argument to fit your audience• Seeing is believing • Anecdotes can be powerful• Don’t forget the potential costs of non-
engagement• Theory of Change
Doncaster furniture recycling
Benefits to council• 488 tonnes of waste
diverted from landfill, saving approximately £20,000 in landfill tax payments.
Benefits to clients • 4000+ low-income
households received goods –estimated supplying same families with second-hand goods would have cost £140,000 with existing market prices.
Exercise
• In groups identify how you might value the costs and benefits of a particular engagement project using the tool.
• Ideally a ‘live’ project; however, it could also be a ‘dummy’ project.
Exercise
1. Define the focus and purpose2. Decide what to measure3. Complete the checklist and chart4. Analyse the results and ‘test’ with other
groups
Tallying the results
Pic
ture
CC
: So
me
right
s re
serv
ed B
y: m
conn
ors
Plenary• What did you discover?• Were there any unexpected results?• What will you do with these results?
Links 1
• Making the case for engagement guide: http://www.involve.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Making-the-Case-for-Public-Engagement.pdf
• Making the case –Excel sheet: http://www.involve.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Calculating-costs-and-benefits-with-comparator.xls
Links 2• Department of Health –Value of PPI:
http://healthandcare.dh.gov.uk/economic-case-for-ppi
• Democratic Society: Financial case white paper http://www.demsoc.org/static/Financial-Case-white-paper.pdf
• IDeA –Making the business case: http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=17455595
Links 3 • National Coordinating Centre -Embedding
Engagement Guide: http://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/support/self-assess
• Involve –True Costs of Participation: http://www.involve.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/True-Costs-Full-Report2.pdf
Links 4 • Sciencewise –Valuing Engagement Guide:
http://www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk/cms/evidence-counts-understanding-the-value-of-public-dialogue/?phpMyAdmin=oHPjaCSrPMAdI04AYEPthe913wb
• Sciencewise –Departmental Dialogue Index: http://www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk/cms/departmental-dialogue-index/?phpMyAdmin=oHPjaCSrPMAdI04AYEPthe913wb
“It is better to be roughly right than precisely wrong”
John Maynard Keynes
The tail endinvolveRoyal London House 22-25 Finsbury Square London EC2A 1DXt: 0 20 7920 6470e: [email protected]: ed_andersson
Pic
ture
CC
: So
me
right
s re
serv
ed B
y: m
conn
ors