Beating the bean counters

13th February 2012


Related Topics

Related tags

  • Business & Industry ,
  • Biodiversity ,
  • EMS ,
  • Management



Mark Everard calls on practitioners to fight back against environment management by numbers

In the face of mounting evidence to the contrary, sustainability professionals must remain optimistic about their ability to help create an ecologically, socially and economically robust future.

While there have been some positive developments over the past two decades, including increased tree cover, improved river quality and better air quality, there is an overwhelming body of evidence that tells another story.

Negative outcomes include escalating, and in some cases apparently runaway, growth in greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions and climate instability, increasing per capita resource intensity and disparities in resource access, and higher levels of food, water and energy poverty. At the same time, there has been a dramatic loss of biodiversity and the resilience of fisheries and ecosystems, burgeoning marine litter, and the erosion, salinisation and eutrophication of soils.

Perversely, these overwhelmingly negative trends over past decades have been concurrent with both the proliferation and increasing stringency of environmental legislation, and a massive switch in organisational approaches to the management of environmental pressures that is founded on the truism that “if you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it.”

Shifting management systems

Over the past 25 years, there has been an imposition of measurable metrics recorded on spreadsheets, for which targets managing organisations’ environmental impacts are then set. Consequently, experience, tacit knowledge and other non-statistical forms of information have been squeezed out of management systems. This has led to the erosion of specialist skills, experiential knowledge and local context.

Yes, we have tighter management, or perhaps more accurately we have tighter accountancy, of disparate facets of the environment. But, despite all these targets and more comprehensive controls, making a transition towards sustainability continues to elude us.

The models we run on the basis of spreadsheet aspirations and targets may sometimes yield us a theoretically “nicer world”, but objective facts and trends tell us quite a different tale. We have, in fact, come to manage spreadsheets and the models that support them, while in so doing divorcing ourselves from the real world and the human actors who are intimately embroiled in both its problems and its pragmatic solutions.

A central tenet of systems thinking is that the relationships between the elements of the system are at least as important as the elements themselves.

It is here that a chasm has formed between management and understanding. The instinct of hierarchical management structures when exposed to a systems approach is to measure the state of elements of the system in a rather reductionist way, overseen by a generalist management community increasingly starved of direct environmental experience.

The management structure subdivides lower strata of organisations to address discreet “elements” – river levels, macroinvertebrate scores, air-quality metrics, data production and analysis, and a range of other discipline-specific management goals – generally without the all-important linkages to address how these different facets interact.

The inherent assumption is that the intelligence to “see” the whole system that is being managed is centralised at the highest tiers of the organisation, effectively treating the lower orders as unintelligent drones. Yet context, interdependence and the wider ramifications of decisions and actions are all too often most apparent to these lower levels through their interactions with the real world of the environment.

A clash of cultures

Today, we are at a crossroads. The stiffly hierarchical culture of (spreadsheet-based) target-setting currently remains in the ascendancy. Take, for example, the first round of implementation of the aspirational and inherently systematic EU Water Framework Directive (WFD (2000/60/EC)). In the UK, early implementation was turned into a “tick list” of compliance, for small water bodies, against some 50 sets of standards.

This approach is insufficient, as the Directive itself is inherently about the vitality of water systems, their ecology and their long-term value to humanity. The fragmentation effect of “systems” on WFD implementation to date has obscured the broader focus on sustainable outcomes.

Under this initial spreadsheet-based model of implementation and management, insight and innovation into realising multidisciplinary, win–win benefits is mostly perceived as a challenge to corporate dogma and management authority, rather than as an opportunity to make step changes towards sustainability and the long-term wellbeing of all. The current approach is manifestly holding back progress towards integrated solutions to inherently interconnected problems, ranging from food security to water-quality management, and from controlling GHG emissions to minimising flood risk.

Unleashing institutional intelligence

The reality is that relatively junior staff in organisations, who are in touch with local catchments and others (including customers) who benefit from and influence ecosystems, are far better placed to know what’s going on: they are more directly exposed to the often perverse outcomes of, for example, poorly targeted agri-environment subsidies, and better informed about how the funds could be best directed to achieve WFD, flood risk, biodiversity and other connected goals, and to work across constituencies capable of identifying and achieving socially beneficial, win-win outcomes.

The explosion of stakeholder-led river trusts across the UK has been hugely successful in addressing these complex issues in connected ways and highlights “grass roots” mobilisation to fill a democratic gap left by fragmented top-down management systems.

Taking account of the complex interactions between ecosystems, people, technology, land use and the economy, river trusts are, in fact, living practitioners of the kinds of progressive accords – the Aarhus Convention, WFD, ecosystem approach, integrated water resources management and so forth – that science and international politics are highlighting as necessary for making progress on sustainable development.


Subscribe to IEMA's newsletters to receive timely articles, expert opinions, event announcements, and much more, directly in your inbox.

Transform articles

New guidance maps out journey to digital environmental assessment

IEMA’s Impact Assessment Network is delighted to have published A Roadmap to Digital Environmental Assessment.

2nd April 2024

Read more

Lisa Pool on how IEMA is shaping a sustainable future with impact assessment

27th November 2023

Read more

IEMA responded in September to the UK government’s consultation on the details of the operational reforms it is looking to make to the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) consenting process as put forward in the NSIP reform action plan (February 2023).

24th November 2023

Read more

Members of IEMA’s Impact Assessment Network Steering Group have published the 17th edition of the Impact Assessment Outlook Journal, which provides a series of thought pieces on the policy and practice of habitats regulations assessment (HRA).

26th September 2023

Read more

In July, we published the long-awaited update and replacement of one of IEMA’s first published impact assessment guidance documents from 1993, Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic.

1st August 2023

Read more

Are we losing sight of its intended purpose and what does the future hold for EIA? Jo Beech, Tiziana Bartolini and Jessamy Funnell report.

15th June 2023

Read more

Luke Barrows and Alfie Byron-Grange look at the barriers to adoption of digital environmental impacts assessments

1st June 2023

Read more

Susan Evans and Helen North consider how Environmental Statements can be more accessible and understandable

1st June 2023

Read more

Media enquires

Looking for an expert to speak at an event or comment on an item in the news?

Find an expert

IEMA Cookie Notice

Clicking the ‘Accept all’ button means you are accepting analytics and third-party cookies. Our website uses necessary cookies which are required in order to make our website work. In addition to these, we use analytics and third-party cookies to optimise site functionality and give you the best possible experience. To control which cookies are set, click ‘Settings’. To learn more about cookies, how we use them on our website and how to change your cookie settings please view our cookie policy.

Manage cookie settings

Our use of cookies

You can learn more detailed information in our cookie policy.

Some cookies are essential, but non-essential cookies help us to improve the experience on our site by providing insights into how the site is being used. To maintain privacy management, this relies on cookie identifiers. Resetting or deleting your browser cookies will reset these preferences.

Essential cookies

These are cookies that are required for the operation of our website. They include, for example, cookies that enable you to log into secure areas of our website.

Analytics cookies

These cookies allow us to recognise and count the number of visitors to our website and to see how visitors move around our website when they are using it. This helps us to improve the way our website works.

Advertising cookies

These cookies allow us to tailor advertising to you based on your interests. If you do not accept these cookies, you will still see adverts, but these will be more generic.

Save and close