Sustainability assessment of the study area

Table 3 Environmental protection scenario Objectives Measures Conservation and rehabilitation of natural resources Establishment of environmental administrations Preservation of historical sites Together with the development of infrastructure within the region, Increase of managerial efficiency to reduce losses in resources water and electricity transmissions there will be also a careful environmental monitoring Relieve congestion in rapidly expanding urban areas Improvements in town planning Investments in public transport systems to solve congestion problems in urban business districts Investments in waste water treatment systems More control over areas facing critical environmental problems local authorities Local authorities will be encouraged to improve their land use planning and accelerate the formulation of plans to preserve historical sites and recreational areas Specific zones will be demarcated for pollution generation industries in order to facilitate more control over pollution, as well as to economize on the costs of pollution control Internalization of environmental costs in commodity Enforcement of the polluter-pays principle prices an overall response of the given indicator. If first-order intermediate impacts are taking place, directly-related second-order intermediate elements may change as well. These impacts can then be assessed in the second step. In the third step, the resulting changes in other elements are assessed, and so on. This procedure can be repeated for higher order impacts until they become small or the information content becomes very unreliable. A detailed description of this approach applied to India can be found in Nijkamp and Van Pelt 1987. A complete presentation of the various subsystems used for our Thai case study will be given in Section 5, where also the sustainability indicators per subsystem will be defined. The above approach leads directly to a numerical or at least a qualitative assessment of the impact matrix where, the outcomes of all indicator scores criteria for all scenarios are mapped out. Because the impact matrix is an input variable in our flag model, it is an important part of the sustainability analysis. This impact matrix is thus the result of a systematic assessment analysis, in which the conse- quences of the different scenarios are presented. Thus, in this impact assessment the complex system alluded to above must be analyzed step by step in order to trace the effects that the different scenarios will likely have on the system at hand. An additional empirical problem appeared to arise in our case when the above-mentioned methodology was applied to obtain CTVs for the SongkhlaHat Yai area. Due to the lack of reliable quantitative and expert information, it was not possible to specify with sufficient precision the entire socio-economic and environmental system nor the conditions and relationships between the various subsystems. As a consequence, an unam- biguous estimate of CTV min and CTV max was not possible. To overcome this problem, the CTVs used in our assessment were obtained by constructing three auxiliary visions for approximating these values. This will also be discussed in Section 5.

5. Sustainability assessment of the study area

In this part of the paper the development scenar- ios mapped out in Section 4 will be assessed in terms of their sustainability consequences. In order to evaluate these scenarios, sustainability in- dicators and the effect these scenarios have on these indicators, need to be measured. Therefore, the SongkhlaHat Yai area is represented as a com- plex regional system. For this complex system sustainability indicators are next identified, while next the consequences of these development sce- narios for these sustainability indicators are traced by means of this complex system. The result of this assessment is thus based on a quali- tative impact matrix. We will follow here the successive steps described in Fig. 1. 5 . 1 . Step 0: design of complex regional system for the SongkhlaHat Yai area In the first part of our analysis the economic, social and environmental subsystems within the SongkhlaHat Yai area are seen and represented as a multi-faceted, interlinked system. As men- tioned already, due to lack of quantitative infor- mation the complex system of the SongkhlaHat Yai area will be mapped out in a graphical way by means of graphs and arrows. The design of this system is made in a modular fashion. This means that the main components of the regional system economic, social, demographic and envi- ronmental make up the architecture of the sys- tem, while next in a systematically nested way the various interlinked sub-components are depicted. The design of this system for the SongkhlaHat Yai region is based on extensive field work in close consultation and cooperation with several regional and local experts. The presentation of this complex system can be found in Fig. 2. By following a stimulus-response approach it is in Fig. 2. Concise version of the qualitative complex systems model for the SongkhlaHat Yai area; D, demand; S, supply. Table 4 The sustainability indicators used Indicator Type of indicator Employment primary sector Economic indicator Employment secondary sector Economic indicator Economic indicator Employment tertiary sector Economic indicator Employment government Employment tourism Economic indicator Economic indicator Involuntary unemployed Economic indicator Total income Income distribution Economic indicator Social indicator Shortage of housing Quality of facilities Social indicator Social indicator Health and educational conditions Quality of life Social indicator Shortage of renewable resources Environmental indicator Environmental Shortage of non-renewable resources indicator Environmental Quality of environment indicator Demographic Total population indicator Migration Demographic indicator Social welfare Aggregated indicator In our empirical research the expected value of the indicators is assessed on the basis of the likely influence a scenario exerts on these indicators. In a purely qualitative sense, two binary possibilities concerning the variables can be used in our ap- proach: a minus sign − 1 is used when an increase in the value of the indicator has a nega- tive effect on social welfare; a plus sign + 1 is used when an increase in the value of the indica- tor influences social welfare positively. As men- tioned above, the final judgement concerning the impact of scenarios on regional sustainability is made with the help of the CTVs, in particular in terms of the frequency of occurrence of green, yellow, red and black flags Table 4. 5 . 3 . Step 2: estimation of regional impact matrix After the presentation of the complex regional system and the selection of sustainability indica- tors, it is now possible to estimate empirically the implications of various policy scenarios. In mea- suring the effects a policy scenario has on the sustainability indicators, the impact matrix plays a crucial role. This can be pursued by tracing the consequences of a policy measure, step by step through the whole of the complex system de- signed. As mentioned above, a distinction will be made between first, second, third and higher order effects. These influences determine the total effect a scenario has on the indicator concerned. All effects are standardized, and each possible effect can be described by qualitative symbols + + , + , + − , − or − − . Several of these qualita- tive expressions have an underlying quantitative value, but for the sake of uniformity we will present all effect values in qualitative terms see for a concise presentation the left-hand part of the matrix in Table 5. These empirically-based values will be deployed in the final assessment with the help of the flag model. By means of this computer model the values will be compared to a set of a priori formulated CTVs see below. Clearly, each sce- nario A, B and C has different effects. A short description of the effects of each separate scenario on the indicators will follow, where the assess- ment is largely based on expert opinion in the area under study. principle possible to estimate the implications of distinct policy scenarios for various relevant sus- tainability indicators. 5 . 2 . Step 1: identification of measurable sustainability indicators By means of systematic field work in the SongkhlaHat Yai area, a rather extensive data base has been constructed which offered sufficient insight into the working of the different subsys- tems and their mutual relationships. In the sus- tainability analysis, 18 different indicators are used. These indicators show clearly the influence of the various scenarios on the area and are therefore useful for our analysis. With the help of the four subsystems mentioned above, measurable sustainability indicators can be subdivided into four subgroups, namely, economic indicators, so- cial indicators, demographic indicators and envi- ronmental indicators. P . Nijkamp , R . Vreeker Ecological Economics 33 2000 7 – 27 19 Table 5 Indicator values and CTV intervals for the weak, moderate and strong sustainability test Sustainability visions Scenarios CTV interval: weak CTV interval: moderate Regional and CTV interval: strong Decentralisation Environmental Sustainability sectoral sustainability indicator sustainability protection sustainability promotion Indicator \+ Indicator \++ +− +− + Indicator\ +− Employment primary sector Indicator\ + Indicator\ ++ Employment sec- +− + +− Indicator\ +− ondary sector Indicator\ + Indicator\ ++ +− + Indicator\ +− + Employment tertiary sector Indicator\ + Indicator\ ++ Employment govern- +− +− +− Indicator\ +− ment Indicator\ ++ Indicator\ +− +− Indicator\ + +− +− Employment tourism +− Indicator B+− Indicator B− Indicator B−− Involuntary unem- −− −− ployed Indicator\ ++ Indicator\ +− +− Indicator\ + + ++ Total income −− Indicator B− Indicator B−− − +− Income distribution Indicator B+− Indicator B−− +− +− Indicator B+− Indicator B− Shortage of housing +− +− − +− Quality of facilities Indicator\ +− Indicator\ + Indicator\ ++ Health and educa- +− Indicator\ + Indicator\ ++ Indicator\ +− + +− tional facilities Indicator\ +− Indicator\ + Indicator\ ++ +− Quality of life − +− Indicator B− Indicator B−− Indicator B+− + Shortage of renew- +− + able resources Indicator B− Shortage of non re- Indicator B−− + +− − Indicator B+− newable resources Indicator\ + Indicator\ ++ + +− Indicator\ +− +− Quality of environ- ment Total population + +− Has an influence on all + other subsystems Has an influence on all +− +− + Migration other subsystems Indicator\ ++ +− +− Indicator\ + Indicator\ +− Social welfare +− 5 . 3 . 1 . Decentralization scenario The decentralization scenario has a slight to substantial positive influence on employment, to- tal income and income distribution. Slightly posi- tive effects on the social indicators may also be distinguished. These effects were to be expected because this scenario was developed to redis- tribute welfare from Bangkok to the regional centers and the surrounding areas. In this respect the scenario seems successful. But it also has a shadow-side, as it is accompanied by undesirable environmental effects, which take up an extra amount of renewable and exhaustible resources. The assimilative capacity of the environment is also negatively affected. These combined effects may nevertheless slightly improve regional wel- fare. The extent to which this scenario meets the pre-defined CTVs, and hence to which extent it meets the conditions for sustainability, is dis- cussed in Section 6. 5 . 3 . 2 . Promotion of sectoral and regional de6elopment scenario This scenario has also a positive influence on employment, total income and the income distri- bution. The effects on total income are less sub- stantial, probably because of the measures concerning the treaty on the IMT-growth triangle. These initiatives will mainly have positive effects in the long term; in the first instance they will be focused on the primary sector, which was already under some pressure in Thailand. The effects on the social indicators are approximately the same as the effects on the social indicators in the former scenario. Decentralization, however, has a broader effect on the supply of housing. This seems a logical consequence since this scenario focuses on the decentralization of income and prosperity. On the other hand, the promotion of sectoral development has a less negative effect on the environment. This is mainly caused by mea- sures which are focused on the restructuring of the agricultural sector and which emphasize im- provements in cultivation systems and farming methods, the formulation of land use policies in order to bring agricultural activities in line with the potential of the land, and the higher accessi- bility to water resources. Measures which concern the promotion of tourism also have a positive influence on the environment, especially with re- gard to natural environment conservation. The total effect on social welfare is likely not very different from the effect the decentralization sce- nario has on this indicator. 5 . 3 . 3 . En6ironmental protection scenario The final scenario seeks to ensure an improve- ment of environmental quality in the area. With regard to this scenario it is plausible that it will have a positive effect on all environmental indica- tors, and this is indeed shown in the impact matrix. This scenario however, has only a very slightly positive influence on employment and the income distribution. An improvement in environ- mental protection results clearly in the improve- ment of the quality of life in the SongkhlaHat Yai area. 5 . 4 . Step 3: specification of CTVs for sustainability The extent to which the sustainability condi- tions for the area concerned are stringent depends on a priori unknown value judgements. Compen- sation measures may also be incorporated in or- der to cope with conflicts between priori specified social welfare objectives. It is clear that the establishment of CTVs is not immediately straightforward. In our case, there was not direct and sufficient export knowledge available. Therefore, as part of the policy strategy assessment we decided to introduce three virtual visions which may function as three options for establishing a CTV, which might generate a varia- tion around an average value in terms of CTV min and CTV max . Thus, three auxiliary visions on CTVs are constructed to overcome these empirical problems in specifying a set of normative refer- ence values for the SongkhlaHat Yai area. Al- though the values within these auxiliary visions on CTVs are not clearly specified, they are useful in the evaluation of the effects of the development scenarios on the sustainability indicators. These auxiliary visions are coined here: weak, moderate and strong progress. In the impact matrix, the effects on the sustain- ability indicators are represented by standardized qualitative values originating from the impact ma- trix; these values can also be used to develop different CTVs for each sustainability indicator. Within the ‘weak progress’ vision, CTVs are set less stringently than in other visions on CTVs. Sustainability in this vision is defined as ‘non-neg- ative’ impacts on the sustainability indicators, and sustainability is thus achieved when the effects of a development scenario has at least a + − sign, i.e. no further environmental decay. So, this vision contains the minimum CTVs for the sus- tainability indicators. Within the other two visions moderate and strong progress the CTVs appeared to become more stringent; this is useful to identify the most sustainable development scenario. If, for example, scenario A is sustainable within the ‘strong pro- gress vision’, and if the other two scenario’s B and C meet only the requirements for sustainabil- ity within the ‘weak progress vision’, one can conclude that scenario A is the most sustainable one. For each sustainability indicator the relevant CTV is represented here in a qualitative sense, although in most cases quantitative information does exist Vreeker, 1997. Therefore, the CTVs in our assessment procedure have been set as the following values as shown in Table 6. In Section 6 the results of the sustainability assessment will be given, while also the results of the comparison of the effects with the visions on CTVs will be analyzed for all sustainability indi- cators for a brief representation of the values of the 11 sustainability indicators and their corre- sponding CTVs we refer to Table 5. 5 . 5 . Step 4: e6aluation of sustainability strategies or scenarios In the sustainability assessment, by means of the flag model, the outcomes of sustainability indicators are compared to the CTVs. After the comparison of a sustainability indicator with its CTV, a coloured flag is assigned to the value of this indicator see Section 2. The set of sustain- ability indicators is evaluated in a separate model of the flag computer programme. Due to lack of quantitative information a qualitative approach is necessarily used here. The qualitative approach only takes into account the colour of the flags see Section 2. Only flag counts and cross-tabulation when two scenarios are compared are allowed. The outcomes can also be visualized by means of pie charts and stack bars. The results of the comparisons will now be presented in Section 6.

6. Interpretation of the results of the Thai case study