The New Fair Metric

Public Evaluation on Socio-Cultural Value

​

Using the categories we identified through our focus group research, we came up with 10 areas of concern that residents would have if a development were to disrupt an area or ecosystem they were familiar with, or in close proximity to. These categories were ranked and provided a weight from 1-10 in order of how nature-centred they were - for example, a resident  concerned with the loss of biodiversity within the area demonstrates a greater desire for ecosystem protection and has greater nature-centred concerns than a resident more concerned with the value of their property does. The finalised categories form part of what we are terming, the ‘Public Evaluation on Socio-Cultural Value’. Essentially a survey provided to eligible local residents during the planning stages of a proposed development. The eligibility for a resident to participate in the survey is dependent upon their distance from the development site. The independent body set up to both distribute and collect data from the surveys, as well as producing the attached objective information sheet on the proposed development, will also determine the eligibility distance. This will vary between projects depending upon the development’s scale, type and disruption expected during construction.

Crucially, we recognise that everyone posses some form of relationship and thus value for nature. Therefore in designing the Public Evaluation on Socio-Cultural Value Survey we aimed to make it as accessible as possible. Eligibility for the survey therefore extends to all those within the designated radius who have reached the age of 12. At this age we assume that recipients of the survey are literate and can understand the simple wording of the question, as well as formulate an independent opinion. The calculated Socio-Cultural Value Score, which would work out at a number between 1 and 10, is then incorporated into ‘The New Fair Metric’ (see Calculations and Scoring).

 

We would propose an independent body be responsible for the distribution and collection of the Public Evaluation on Socio-Cultural Value survey. However, crucially, the finances required for such a task be provided by the developer. It is our hope that the extra cost necessary to calculate the required biodiversity offsetting units proves to be a market-based disincentive for developers who automatically reach to biodiversity offsetting, pushing them to look further up the mitigation hierarchy.

​

Are the survey participants informed of which development is in question?

Yes - part of the aim of the Public Evaluation on Socio-Cultural Value survey is to set a precedent for transparency and communication between local residents and developers. If developers have access to the opinions of survey respondents, (see below),  it is only fair that participants are aware of who this information is being fed to, despite this information being anonymous.

Since development projects, at the time of the survey being conducted, are in planning stages, an objective summary brief of the development, composed by the independent body set up to distribute and collect the surveys, will be attached to the survey. This will provide residents with the project’s purpose, exact location (including map), the size of area being disrupted and the expected duration of construction.

The aim of the Public Evaluation on Socio-Cultural Value is to ascertain an accurate valuation of an area’s importance to the local community. If respondents are privy to information on the development at hand, this may introduce bias into the results should a community be against the nature or type of development itself, or the developer. To tackle this, we propose an objective summary brief of the planned development, composed by the independent body distributing and collecting the surveys, to be attached to the Public Evaluation on Socio-Cultural Value survey including the project’s purpose, expected duration of construction and the exact location and size of area being disrupted.

 

What happens if a resident does not reply to the Public Evaluation on Socio-Cultural Value Survey?

 

Since the data collected within the Public Evaluation on Socio-Cultural Value survey is shared with developers, we anticipate that those eligible will be incentivised to respond whether these concerns are nature-centred or more individually centred. For example, a resident concerned about noise will be eager to alert the developer to her concerns. Equally, a resident concerned about biodiversity loss will seek to have their concern for nature identified and work towards increasing the required number of offsetting units.

Nevertheless, there will inevitably be some who are not motivated to respond. A number of statistical tests  will be carried out on the data collected to ensure that a representative spread has been achieved. This is the basis for requiring the gender and date of birth on the survey itself. Such data analysis will be carried out by the independent body that both distributes and collects the surveys.  If the survey has a robust and representative sample spread, then the presence of some non-responders will not drastically skew the results.
 

What information will the developers themselves gain access to?

Those who fill in the survey have guaranteed anonymity - their personal information will not in any way be passed onto the developer. All of the data collected by the independent body in terms of the ranked categories will be relayed to the developer, including the number of participants and the eligibility area.  

It is in the public’s interest for the developer to be privy to such information; the more public consultation the developer has, the fewer obstacles and causes for social objection they face later on. It is therefore also in the developer’s interest to utilise such data. For example, if noise ranks as, on average, the community’s greatest concern, it is in the developer’s interest to invest in natural noise barriers within their planning.
 

The fact that such information will be shared with the developer will also serve as an incentive for residents to complete the survey. It is through the survey that their concerns, no matter how nature-centred they are, can be voiced to developers - essentially acting as a form of public consultation in its own right.