14. Towards an Integrated Information System for Sustainable Development
14.1 Features of an information system
This report has highlighted the difficulties in defining the goals of sustainable development, which in any case evolve over time. Accordingly, we pointed to the need to adopt a process approach, which encouraged people to work co-operatively, at different levels, to bring about change on the ground. It is recognised that decisions depend on many factors besides those of sustainable development information. These other factors include market signals, group bias, regulations, economic necessities, etc. However, the aim of extension is to raise the profile and use of sustainable development information within this mix.
We have also outlined how emerging models of extension, which support the provision of an integrated sustainable development information system, differ from more traditional linear approaches to information flows. These new models see research, dissemination (technology/ information transfer), and users (policy makers, land managers, scientists) as forming elements of a larger social system, through which people learn through experience (feedback from their actions) and their interactions with others (networking) to gain new perspectives on issues. Traditional, linear forms of extension work within the models to support awareness.
While information is central to the learning process, to be effective the provision of information has to be supported by a number of other social processes, particularly those related to social capital (the processes that ‘oil’ the transfer of information between different groups). Furthermore, learning in this way requires a certain ‘capability’ for understanding information and engaging in (or managing) participatory processes that is not always present in agencies facilitating extension activities, or groups of end-users who could be expected to benefit by their participation.
We would expect extension projects based on an integrated information system to demonstrate many of the following:
| An integrated information system that brings fragmented information together around systems and issues, is updateable, and can be easily accessed by different stakeholders. |
| Processes that integrate science learning/ and layperson learning. |
| Processes to integrate multi-stakeholder viewpoints to develop a shared understanding of information related to complex questions. |
| Processes that allow for contextual learning, and use monitoring to enhance understanding/ feedback about ecology/ land-use practices (including adaptive management processes). |
| Collaborative approaches that enable the different stakeholders to go through ongoing cycles of systematic learning, analysing how actions and policies impact on local economic, social and natural systems. With such learning being seen as part of a sustained learning and action effort that is planned, and managed for, the long term rather than for short term problem solutions. |
| Approaches that invest in developing capacity to learn/change e.g., social capital – not just straight information dissemination. |
| Use of extension processes to support/run alongside other policy mechanisms (economic, regulatory, etc.). |
| Processes that can cope with the rapid change in knowledge (built-in flexibility). |
| There are monitoring processes for agreed social, economic and environmental goals, which focus on outcomes rather than outputs. |
| Regular participatory and formative evaluation focusses on the processes of learning as much as on the achievement of the extension programme goals. |
14.2 Constraints to achieving a more integrated system
As Section 13 has highlighted, a number of initiatives that address these elements required for effective sustainable development extension are already in place. This verifies the main thrust of this report in advocating a more collaborative, participatory and learning-based approach towards sustainable development extension. However, an integrated system is still emerging, and while there are many success stories, it is equally evident that in other cases process issues are addressed in name only. If, as seems evident, we are talking about processes that may take a number of years to reach fruition, then there is still a lot to be learned about how to measure progress in these areas, or communicate this clearly to the required audiences.
In particular, we note the constraints to achieving a more integrated approach to sustainable development extension.
- Information and knowledge is fragmented
- There is a lack of capacity to institute collaborative and learning-based approaches on a scale beyond that of individual groups.
- There is a need to mainstream appropriate evaluation processes, including indicators of success, both to support and measure progress towards such wide-scale collaborative approaches.
14.2.1 Addressing fragmented information and knowledge
A common problem noted during this research is that information is not readily available to interested parties. In general, a large knowledge base already exists for most of the issues managers deal with. Years of experience have provided land managers, other resource users and policy makers with a wealth of knowledge of their local systems. Unfortunately this information is rarely documented, nor is it available to decision makers on a collective basis. Similarly, much of the valuable knowledge that scientists have accumulated is fragmented and held in different databases.
Bringing local and scientific knowledge systems together can provide land managers and the wider community with a valuable knowledge base to help decision making. They would gain direct access to useful knowledge without having to rely solely on fragmented bases of data and experience. Given that our knowledge of natural resource systems is, and will always be, incomplete, Bosch et al. (1996) suggest the use of the Internet, particularly because it can be easily enhanced over time by ongoing feedback and learning.
Given the decentralised grouping of agencies, land managers, and other individuals within the natural resource management arena, the Internet is emerging as a valuable tool in information management. It allows different groups or organisations to maintain control over their own information, while sharing a common 'gateway' with a number of complementary systems.
While the notion of a central information system seems an ideal way of resolving the tensions over disparate information sources, such a system will often be unsustainable in multi-stakeholder situations where stakeholders expect to retain full control over their own data and information. An alternative is to promote a network concept that conveys the reality that the information system is a collection of participating stakeholders rather than a particular information project or item of technology.
Internet technology will inevitably play a role in future information systems, not least because it offers a unifying platform on which the collection of information for both internal and external use can be provided. However, in terms of development, whether this reinforces the status quo or improves social well-being and equity is still a contentious topic. In general, the Internet is still used primarily for information display and retrieval, although it appears to have considerable potential in multi-stakeholder situations to extend information sharing, learning and networking. The advantages of the technology are not in creating new virtual communities, but in strengthening already existing social networks
This approach also provides new challenges for extension. Not all farmers, community members or conservation managers are going to be directly involved in such a collaborative-research approach to land management, nor should we regard all those who become directly involved in such participatory processes as direct users of such a multi-stakeholder information system. There are also a number of individuals who do not have, or necessarily want, access to computing and Internet facilities. Increasingly, however, people do belong to a range of groups (e.g., Landcare, NGOs). These groups are serviced by facilitators and group leaders, and act to develop an effective cooperative environment for information exchange and learning. In this way there is potential for facilitators and group leaders to act as the interface between the Internet-based information system and individuals. In itself, the Internet has the potential to form a powerful and immediate link between group facilitators, group leaders, researchers, and other relevant agency staff. Strengthening this link will contribute towards more effective sharing of information among the diverse range of groups involved in natural resource management.
A final consideration, but a major one, in the development of an integrated information system is how to institutionalise it to ensure continuity. The difficulty centres around who has the mandate to provide ongoing support for such a system, and whether it should be undertaken by one or multiple groups. In turn, these questions are related to how different groups regard the goal of such an information system – is it just to benefit land managers, or is it a public good?
14.2.2 Addressing lack of capacity to institute collaborative and learning-based approaches on a scale beyond that of individual groups
Agencies must build their own capacity to engage in participatory processes. This might include allowing staff time for such processes, and changing the organisational culture.
Social capital is a ‘common good’ that needs to be formed across sectors and institutions. This means that all agencies that benefit from social capital must put resources into building the skills necessary for developing social capital. Building this form of capital supports the development of appropriate information flows and systems in sustainable development.
Adaptive management (or experiential learning) processes must be integrated into both policy and management settings.
14.2.3 Mainstreaming evaluation
Multi-stakeholder and formative evaluation approaches are needed if more integrated systems are to be achieved. These processes simultaneously develop capacity, improve individual initiatives, and enable us to learn the generic lessons from different approaches.
Evaluation has a value beyond the immediate role of supporting capacity development within the involved group. Because of their nature, collaborative initiatives are only made possible with support from a number of different parties, all of whom need to be kept informed of progress and outcomes. Funders need evidence that their investments are paying off. In particular, there is a need to develop intermediate indicators of success (e.g., within the time-frame of funding cycles) for process-oriented initiatives such as capacity building. Equally, other stakeholders who are giving of their time to help the particular effort (e.g., land managers providing information, agency staff facilitating projects) are also important audiences for information about the progress of the initiative. They too need evidence that their input is having an effect - at the least, to maintain their motivation for continued involvement.
Good evaluation is also needed to generate useful feedback to guide implementation. Managers need feedback to assess progress, assist with planning, and guide ongoing refinements to operations. Moreover, such collaborative initiatives are essentially experiments providing opportunities for practitioners and action researchers to test their knowledge and experience. In this way much can be learnt about fundamental and cross-cutting questions concerning the best way to model programmes, or to examine more closely the role that ‘social capital’ and ‘capacity-building’ can play in helping achieve more environmentally sound management. This information, in turn, can be fed back to shape future policy and research agendas. Institutionalising evaluation processes is, once again, a major challenge to the success of a learning-based sustainable development extension programme.
14.3 Concluding thoughts
Improving sustainable farming practice involves focussing on environment and community as well as on farm production. While extension has previously focussed on production, there is a growing recognition that it could have a role in helping farmers achieve sustainability in a world where consumers are increasingly demanding that farming practice be environmentally friendly and socially responsible.
This report outlines the key role that good information management and the development of constructive learning environments can play in bringing about change in sustainable management. If these changes are to be achieved, individuals and communities must be supportive of, and directly involved in, research and decision making. As agencies and institutions initiate actions to further such collaborative approaches, the role of evaluation becomes important. It provides tools and approaches to ensure that policy development can be experimental or adaptive, and includes the full participation of those who are expected to benefit.
Contact for Enquiries
Rural Affairs Coordinator
Sector Performance Policy
MAF Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0675
Fax: +64 4 4 894 0745
Contact this person
