Transcript Central Queensland Indicators of Community Wellbeing

Institute for
Sustainable
Regional
Development
Value Adding to
Regional Planning
Processes Community Wellbeing
Presentation by
Lindsay Greer and David
Kraatz
Regional Social Impacts
of Economic Growth Forum
August 2007
In partnership with
CQANM
Presentation outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Key challenges for regional Queensland
Concerns with regional data
Framework for community wellbeing
Existing studies
Central Queensland case study
Regional planning processes
Conclusion
Objective
• To offer an explanation and a rationale for
the inclusion of a set of social and
community indicators of wellbeing into
contemporary regional planning processes
• To develop a sustainable model for a set of
community wellbeing indicators that is
clearly linked to government policy and
draws on local experience, knowledge and
concerns
Why?
•
•
•
•
Currently in a period of sustained growth
Growth is not uniform
Will not last forever
We need the best available evidence to
inform
– Decision making
– Citizen engagement
– Community planning
Key Challenges
• Increasing globalisation of markets
• Increasing competition between regions
• Growing corporatisation (off-shore
decision making)
• Rapid technology change
• Population changes
• Changes in regional age compositions
More challenges
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Skills shortage
Increased worker mobility
Increased career expectations/mobility
Infrastructure bottlenecks
Environment and heritage issues
Community wellbeing issues
Economy/tourism issues
Governance issues
Problems with existing regional
data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Lack of consistent data
Irregularity of updated datasets
Limited resources to update data
Difficulties accessing data
Multiple/conflicting data sets being used
Difficulty doing regional comparisons
Lack of small area data
Cost
Lack of social indicators
Framework for community
wellbeing project
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Data collection and dissemination that is:
Regionally based and relevant
Regularly updated
Economic to produce
Easily understood
Consistent
Able to measure change
Included social data as well as economic,
environmental & governance
Framework for community
wellbeing
• Four fundamental resources (capitals)
• Natural capital – natural resources, ecosystems
and aesthetic features
• Produced economic capital – manufactured or
harvested goods and services
• Human capital – skills and knowledge
• Social and institutional capital – OECD
definition ‘networks, together with shared norms, values
and understandings which facilitate cooperation within or
among groups’
Social capital
• Social capital is seen as a resource that
draws on and feeds back into the other
three resources
• They all contribute to a wide range of
wellbeing outcomes
• Attributes – social participation (networks,
bonds and bridges)
• Qualities (strength) such as trust, altruism
and reciprocity
Social capital
• Productivity Commission report (2003)
• Communities with good SC tend to be
more ‘hired, housed, healthy and happy’
• However, PC concludes ‘there is a limited
understanding of SC and how different
policies interact with it, and measurement
is difficult’
• Can public policy increase existing stocks
of social capital?
Community Wellbeing
• Measuring wellbeing is a critical role for
Government
• Vital for knowing how the community is faring
• Must involve a set of indicators that are
statistically robust and reliable, and accurate
• Must be relatively easy to use and interpret
• Assist policy development processes to
respond to complex challenges confronting
legislators and citizens.
Measuring Wellbeing
• No single measure of wellbeing that satisfies all
parties all the time
• Select to inform particular issues of interest
• Some indicators are fundamental to wellbeing (e.g.
health status, inequality measures, unemployment
rates)
• Wellbeing indicators influenced by the concerns
of contemporary culture
• Focus on conditions that can be influenced by
policy and intervention
(ABS, 2001: 6)
The State of Play
Who is doing what
• South Australia – based on Oregon Shine
Project and closely integrated to six main
objectives of SA strategic plan (top down
approach)
• Tasmania Together 2020 - twenty year
Social, Environmental and Economic Plan.
Closer community consultation than SA
• Victorian Community Indicators (VCI)– a Vic
Health funded project – broad partnership
btw State Gov’t and Communities (79 LGA’s)
The State of Play
Who is doing what cont:
• Canada – Newfoundland & Labrador Community
Accounts – joint citizen – government project
• OECD – Long term project ‘Global Project on
Measuring the Progress of Societies’
• Queensland – Currently have the Healthy
communities project
• Dept of Communities - keep in-house profiles on
wellbeing
A Case Study Approach
• Partnership Approach
– CQANM
– Emerald Shire Council
– Institute for Sustainable Regional
Development Central Queensland
University
• Emerald as the area under study
– conducted concurrently with their
regular customer satisfaction survey
Project Drivers
Two key drivers behind this project
• The need to adequately inform local
government strategic planning
requirements – identified gap in data
collection
• Existing LGA data collection could be
value added
Framework for the model
• Integrated, strategic and sustainable
approach
• Driven by ‘bottom up’ demand from
communities, local gov’t and regional
officers
• Able to also inform state planners and
policy – ‘top down’
Sustaining the Process
Community consultation
and review of end user
requirements to develop
indicators
Analysis of end user
reception – Is the tool
useful?
Allows for qualitative review by community/ expert panel
Data collection ‘piggy backs’ on existing survey
Dissemination of the
results in a format that
is user friendly
Data collection from existing
sources and ‘modified’ local
government customer surveys
Standardised data
processing – creating
suite of indicator or
domain scores
Top down approach:
Policy areas/social dimensions that constitute the
six domains
Social
Economic
Environmental
Domains
Wealth & Affordability
Safety & Public Health
Personal Health & Fitness
Diversity & Learning
Community & Governance
Environment &
Infrastructure
Governance
Cultural
Bottom up approach: indicator sources
that constitute the six domains
Existing
Data Sets
Regional
Issues
Demographic
Data
Domains
Wealth & Affordability
Safety & Public Health
Personal Health & Fitness
Diversity & Learning
Community & Governance
Environment &
Infrastructure
LGA
Questions
Community
Issues
Indicator Framework
The indicators have been divided into a
framework of domains that correspond
with a set of policy areas and concerns.
• Wealth & Affordability
• Safety & Public Health
• Personal Health & Fitness
• Diversity & Learning
• Community & Governance
• Environment & Infrastructure
Key Features of the 6x6
Domain Framework:
• Incorporates TBL (economic, social &
environment)
• Objective/ subjective mix of indicators
within each domain
• Use of multiple indicators for some
indicator headings
• Utilisation of existing data where
possible
Key Features of the 6x6
Domain Framework:
• Utilisation of Local Government
community survey
• Three tiered survey instrument structure
(local government, community
wellbeing and regional issue sections)
• Allows for critique & review of
indicators
Six Domain Model (6 x 6)
Wealth & Affordability
Safety & Public Health
Personal Health & Fitness
Average Cost of Renting
Public Health Services
Adult Overweight
Housing availability
Crime Against Persons
Adult Physical Activity
Housing Activity (Prices Trend)
Crime Against Property
Alcohol Consumption
Personal Income
Other Offences
General Health Status
Economic Stress
Perceptions of safety & crime
Satisfaction with life
Income support
Victim of crime
Work-life balance
Diversity & Learning
Community & Governance
Environment & Infrastructure
Age Distribution
Citizen engagement
Parks and Gardens
Education Level
Community Governance
Community and Recreation
Population Density
Community Connectedness
Roads and Infrastructure
Population Growth
Personal Connectedness
Local Development
Local Arts & Cultural Activities
Community Trust
Environmental Issues
Diversity
Community Participation
Transport
Selected Results
Housing Activity
Selected Results
Selected Results
General Health Status
Selected Results
Citizen engagement
Source: Web sites
Selected Results
Community Participation
Selected Results
Environment and Infrastructure
Radar diagram - Community Wellbeing for
Emerald, Calliope and Rockhampton.
Wealth & Affordability
40
30
Environment & Infrastructure
20
Safety & Public Health
10
0
Community & Governance
Emerald Shire
Calliope
Rockhampton
Personal Health & Fitness
Diversity & Learning
Summary of recoded mean scores for ‘trust
and influence’ community wellbeing variables
within the sample area.
Influence local government
Trust local government
Control over decisions
Influence decisions in n'hood
Returned wallet
Trust people
-20
0
Fitzroy (Gracemere)
Fitzroy (other)
Mt Morgan
20
40
Recoded mean scores
60
Number of organisations that residents
are involved in which are (a) locally based or
(b) outside the local area
(A)
(B)
40
40
Fitzroy (Gracemere)
Fitzroy (other)
Mt Morgan
Fitzroy (Gracemere)
Fitzroy (other)
Mt Morgan
30
% of respondents
% of respondents
30
20
20
10
10
0
0
None
1-2
3-4
5-6
7+
None
1-2
3-4
5-6
7+
Croc found in Fitzroy river then
mauled by three savage dogs
Legislative Framework - IPA /
IDAS Review
• Recommendations on Regional Planning
practices and processes may include
things like:
– Enhanced State planning instruments: statutory
regional plans, State planning policies & standard
planning scheme provisions
– Legislate to ensure State instruments take
precedence over local planning instruments where
conflict occurs
– Regional plans should be the pre-eminent instrument
CQANM Project Aims
• Providing strategies designed to improve
the quality of life for communities,
particularly regarding access to facilities
and services, infrastructure provision and
sustainable environmental practices.
• Providing governments with a regional
focus on fundamental strategic planning
issues.
CQANM Project Aims
• Providing a decision making framework which ensures
complementary actions by the Australian, State and local
governments and the private and community sectors to
create desirable long term growth and development
objectives and avoid duplication and inefficient use of
resources.
• Forming the basis of a comprehensive regional
framework to be implemented through local government
strategic plans and providing guidance for State and
local government planning and development decisions.
• Positioning the region to maximise competitive
advantage and future sustainability.
Planning Project Responses to
Bowen Basin Mining Boom
• Sustainable Futures Framework for
Queensland Mining Towns
• FTE Population Survey 2006 (PIFU)
• Central Queensland Community Wellbeing
Indicators (Pilot Study: Emerald Shire)
Conclusion
The model can value add by:
• Encouraging a compatible minimum
standard for regional community
surveys
• Benchmarking a set of indicators that
can be aligned to regional policy and
planning
Conclusion
The model can value add by: cont
• Measuring regional performance
across a broad range of indicators
that encompass the TBL
• Encouraging further in-depth
examination of areas identified as
significant
How to get it to work?
Experience of other projects indicates
that success requires:
• A partnership approach
• Strong regional support
• Stakeholders must see clear benefits
that relate directly to their planning
mechanisms
How to get it to work?
Experience of other projects indicates
that success requires:
• It must support evidence based –
informed decision making
• Equally important it should advance
community engagement and better
inform citizens