Some excellent discussion & insights about the roles and opportunities of #communityengagement during today’s IAP2’s session on “Groundbreakers and Transparency Makers: the role of Engagement in ESG”, following the launch of their corresponding report. One of the main points was that engagement can often get pigeon-holed as an ‘S’ in ESG consideration, but it is actually relevant across the E, S, & the G. At the same time, engagement with communities is also not the only thing in the ‘S’ component - with social impact & social performance a much broader consideration. IMO, and in terms of social performance on infrastructure & energy projects, community engagement functions are the most likely resourcing place for driving better social outcomes on projects in the future. The reason I say this is that engagement roles and functions are relatively common now (and budgeted for), whereas it is still an anomaly to see social impact specialists on projects in Australia, beyond contributing a section to an EIS/IA approval. It’s quite rare to see a Social Impact or Social Outcomes badged role during construction or in the operational team. Instead, the “social” scope often is assumed to be in the engagement function. (NB Internationally, I’ve observed it’s a somewhat different story though and arguably the other way around with often more social specialists and less engagement/comms functions). Community engagement professionals bring very useful skills that are needed for current transformational sector challenges like the energy transition, and especially when they have codesign and deliberative engagement experience (and employ these approaches). To be even more effective though, and to truly drive better social impact and community benefits on projects, I feel most community engagement professionals would need to develop , or bring into corresponding project functions, skillsets & knowledge more specific to social impact (such as theory of change, impact measurement, social valuation, community benefit sharing models, place-making, social risk assessment, social safeguarding & community development) As said by Donna Groves during the session, “if we are going to say we will genuinely engage, we should genuinely engage” 👏 I’ll extend onto this…. if projects & organisations are going to say they are genuinely trying to create positive social impact and community benefits, they also should genuinely do it. That takes engagement skills + social impact skills. There is no doubt (good) engagement amd social impact practice is needed more than ever in the Australian infrastructure & energy sectors. Kudos to the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) Australasia for their advocacy in this space including with this new paper. Kate Kernaghan Marion Short Donna Groves Helen Leayr Sally Hussey Leigh Moran International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) Australasia #socialimpact #stakeholderengagement
Thanks Rebecca that is such a value add. Projects where we have worked alongside those with social impact and community development expertise have always produced good outcomes.
Oh how interesting - I agree that there is definitely a disconnect between the impact and engagement functions, and this absolutely morphs through approvals/construction/operation phases of a project. I'm fascinated to read the report!
Excellent analysis Rebecca! Thank you!
Not to mention long term commitment to see such social impact realised, and that which has been defined and specified and held accountable to. Excellent post Rebecca Roebuck 👏🏽
Tilly Crowhurst - you'll find this of interest. And well worth connecting with Rebecca Roebuck 😊
Excellent post Rebecca thank you! As we discussed recently this is what I am currently interested in and grappling with!
Social Impact Innovation & Strategy | Community Investment | Sustainable Development | ESG
5moAgree, Rebecca; industry needs to develop thinking around *impact positive strategies, not just social impact mitigation and communications.