The integrated impact assessment of road infrastructure in Amazonia

Energy Policy ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 67 ◽  
pp. 626-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sha Yu ◽  
Jiyong Eom ◽  
Meredydd Evans ◽  
Leon Clarke

2017 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Sebastien Marchand ◽  
Maude Brunet

Despite the criticism levelled at it, New Public Management (NPM) seems to be enduring. Post-NPM initiatives remain relatively theoretical and are slow to take root at the heart of the governmental apparatus. Integrated Impact Assessment (IIA), a tool for decision-making at national level, seems to be providing new answers. IIA has developed from NPM regulatory relief initiatives, but its objectives and effects are more in line with post-NPM principles. This article aims to explore the concept of IIA, its development and the implications of its institutionalization. A comparative analysis of IIA practice is carried out for four approaches: three at the national level (France, United Kingdom and Switzerland) and one at the supranational level (European Commission). IIA appears as a hybrid NPM and post-NPM tool, the use of which allows the implementation of certain post-NPM principles. The article concludes on future avenues for research. Points for practitioners Administrations often have to deal with issues related to evidence-based decision-making, transparency and the proliferation of statutory sectoral impact assessments. In a context of limited resources, Integrated Impact Assessment (IIA) can be an attractive solution. However, a careful analysis of its development makes it possible to better understand what its institutionalization actually implies. The practice of IIA makes it possible to systematize consultation with stakeholders, but varies according to the methods used and the administrative structures in place. IIA could serve as a decision-making tool that adds a public interest component and better reflect public values in a decision-making situation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document