@phdthesis{Koenig2012,
  author    = {K{\"o}nig, Hannes Jochen},
  title     = {Operationalising sustainability impact assessment of land use scenarios in developing countries : a stakeholder-based approach with case studies in China, India, Indonesia, Kenya, and Tunisia},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-63672},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Growing populations, continued economic development, and limited natural resources are critical factors affecting sustainable development. These factors are particularly pertinent in developing countries in which large parts of the population live at a subsistence level and options for sustainable development are limited. Therefore, addressing sustainable land use strategies in such contexts requires that decision makers have access to evidence-based impact assessment tools that can help in policy design and implementation. Ex-ante impact assessment is an emerging field poised at the science-policy interface and is used to assess the potential impacts of policy while also exploring trade-offs between economic, social and environmental sustainability targets. The objective of this study was to operationalise the impact assessment of land use scenarios in the context of developing countries that are characterised by limited data availability and quality. The Framework for Participatory Impact Assessment (FoPIA) was selected for this study because it allows for the integration of various sustainability dimensions, the handling of complexity, and the incorporation of local stakeholder perceptions. FoPIA, which was originally developed for the European context, was adapted to the conditions of developing countries, and its implementation was demonstrated in five selected case studies. In each case study, different land use options were assessed, including (i) alternative spatial planning policies aimed at the controlled expansion of rural-urban development in the Yogyakarta region (Indonesia), (ii) the expansion of soil and water conservation measures in the Oum Zessar watershed (Tunisia), (iii) the use of land conversion and the afforestation of agricultural areas to reduce soil erosion in Guyuan district (China), (iv) agricultural intensification and the potential for organic agriculture in Bijapur district (India), and (v) land division and privatisation in Narok district (Kenya). The FoPIA method was effectively adapted by dividing the assessment into three conceptual steps: (i) scenario development; (ii) specification of the sustainability context; and (iii) scenario impact assessment. A new methodological approach was developed for communicating alternative land use scenarios to local stakeholders and experts and for identifying recommendations for future land use strategies. Stakeholder and expert knowledge was used as the main sources of information for the impact assessment and was complemented by available quantitative data. Based on the findings from the five case studies, FoPIA was found to be suitable for implementing the impact assessment at case study level while ensuring a high level of transparency. FoPIA supports the identification of causal relationships underlying regional land use problems, facilitates communication among stakeholders and illustrates the effects of alternative decision options with respect to all three dimensions of sustainable development. Overall, FoPIA is an appropriate tool for performing preliminary assessments but cannot replace a comprehensive quantitative impact assessment, and FoPIA should, whenever possible, be accompanied by evidence from monitoring data or analytical tools. When using FoPIA for a policy oriented impact assessment, it is recommended that the process should follow an integrated, complementary approach that combines quantitative models, scenario techniques, and participatory methods.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KuhlmannWayenberg2016,
  author    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Wayenberg, Ellen},
  title     = {Institutional impact assessment in multi-level systems: conceptualizing decentralization effects from a comparative perspective},
  series = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  volume    = {82},
  journal   = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Sage},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0020-8523},
  doi       = {10.1177/0020852315583194},
  pages     = {233 -- 272},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Comparative literature on institutional reforms in multi-level systems proceeds from a global trend towards the decentralization of state functions. However, there is only scarce knowledge about the impact that decentralization has had, in particular, upon the sub-central governments involved. How does it affect regional and local governments? Do these reforms also have unintended outcomes on the sub-central level and how can this be explained? This article aims to develop a conceptual framework to assess the impacts of decentralization on the sub-central level from a comparative and policy-oriented perspective. This framework is intended to outline the major patterns and models of decentralization and the theoretical assumptions regarding de-/re-centralization impacts, as well as pertinent cross-country approaches meant to evaluate and compare institutional reforms. It will also serve as an analytical guideline and a structural basis for all the country-related articles in this Special Issue. Points for practitioners Decentralization reforms are approved as having a key role to play in the attainment of 'good governance'. Yet, there is also the enticement on the part of state governments to offload an ever-increasing amount of responsibilities to, and overtask, local levels of government, which can lead to increasing performance disparities within local sub-state jurisdictions. Against this background, the article provides a conceptual framework to assess reform impacts from a comparative perspective. The analytical framework can be used by practitioners to support their decisions about new decentralization strategies or necessary adjustments regarding ongoing reform measures.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{KuhlmannWayenberg2016,
  author    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Wayenberg, Ellen},
  title     = {Institutional impact assessment in multi-level systems},
  series = {International review of administrative sciences},
  volume    = {82},
  journal   = {International review of administrative sciences},
  number    = {2},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-405314},
  pages     = {22},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Comparative literature on institutional reforms in multi-level systems proceeds from a global trend towards the decentralization of state functions. However, there is only scarce knowledge about the impact that decentralization has had, in particular, upon the sub-central governments involved. How does it affect regional and local governments? Do these reforms also have unintended outcomes on the sub-central level and how can this be explained? This article aims to develop a conceptual framework to assess the impacts of decentralization on the sub-central level from a comparative and policyoriented perspective. This framework is intended to outline the major patterns and models of decentralization and the theoretical assumptions regarding de-/re-centralization impacts, as well as pertinent cross-country approaches meant to evaluate and compare institutional reforms. It will also serve as an analytical guideline and a structural basis for all the country-related articles in this Special Issue.},
  language  = {en}
}