manual for social impact assessment of land-based ... - Forest Trends

6. Assess project attribution
The use of specific participatory methods to assess attribution is discussed below, but in general the
preferred approach is to separate the project and non-project causative factors, and to find the
relative importance of these factors in the explanation of an identified positive or negative outcome
or impact. PIA methods can also be used to assess attribution when using ‘matching methods’.
7. Triangulate
Triangulation is essential for all data collection methods, including participatory methods.
Sometimes secondary data can be used to check if estimates are in the right ‘ball park’; a short
household survey could be implemented to check participatory methods; or different participatory
methods can be used for triangulation purposes.
8. Feedback and verity the results with the community
It is essential to feed the analysis back and to discuss the results with the communities and other
stakeholders. This is the last opportunity to ‘ground truth’ the results, and the discussions usually
reveal further insights into project outcome and impact processes. Focus groups, e.g., by gender, are
advisable for getting the best feedback quality.
Description of PIA data collection methods (and examples)
Simple ranking and scoring methods
A simple initial approach is to rank and/or score the importance of different possible contributory
factors for a given impact or outcome by placing counters (e.g., seeds or stones) on each potential
contributory factor - these should be represented as far as possible by a picture card or other visual
aid, ideally using local materials.
The ‘proportional piling’ technique involves distributing 20, 50 or 100 stones or seeds among a
number of variables (e.g., contributory factors, potential impacts or indicators). It should be noted
that the greater is the number of counters, the longer the exercise takes – fewer counters can be
used if there are less variables or indicators. The results of proportional piling can be conveniently
presented in a pie chart, as shown in Figure T14.
Ranking can also be undertaken through a voting process using a secret ballot to reduce the bias
caused by peer pressures, strong personalities, etc. Ranking and scoring should be undertaken by
different focus groups, e.g., women and men, and then aggregated.
‘Before and after’ scoring including the use of ‘nominal baselines’
‘Before and after’ scoring involves undertaking proportional piling for the ‘before project’ situation
for a particular variable or indicator (e.g., the pre-project annual cash value of forest products), and
asking the informants or focus group to increase or remove counters according to whether they
think the annual cash value has increased or fallen since the project started compared to the present
Social Impact Assessment of Land-Based Carbon Projects (1.0) – Part II | 47