Skip to main content

Foundations of Evaluation for Planetary Health: Conclusion

Foundations of Evaluation for Planetary Health
Conclusion

  • Show the following:

    Annotations
    Resources

  • Adjust appearance:

    Font
    Font style
    Color Scheme
    Light
    Dark
    Annotation contrast
    Low
    High
    Margins
  • Search within:
    • My Notes + Comments
    • Notifications
    • Privacy
  • Project HomeFoundations of Evaluation for Planetary Health
  • Projects
  • Learn more about Manifold

Notes

table of contents
  1. Abstract
  2. Acknowledgements
  3. About the Authors
    1. Astrid Brousselle
    2. Kai Mountfort
  4. Invitation
  5. Prologue: The Hummingbird Fable
  6. Introduction
    1. Earth Day Evaluation Declaration 2024
    2. Endnotes
  7. 1. Context Matters: Evaluation in the 21st Century
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Environmental and Social Depletion
    4. Reducing Risks
    5. Local Cultural Contexts
    6. Evaluation Takes Place in a Political Context
    7. Post-truth Influence as the New Propaganda
    8. Conclusion
    9. Endnotes
  8. 2. Evaluation for Planetary Health
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals
    4. The Planetary Health Framework
    5. A Transformative Approach
    6. Conclusion
    7. Endnotes
  9. 3. The Planetary Health Rapid Impact Assessment Tool
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. The Planetary Health Rapid Impact Assessment Tool
    4. Conclusion
    5. Endnotes
  10. 4. Evaluation: Definitions, Approaches and Questions
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Definitions
    4. Evaluation Approaches
    5. When to Evaluate and for What Purpose?
    6. Evaluative Questions
    7. Conclusion
    8. Endnotes
  11. 5. Preparing for the Evaluation
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Evaluation Use and the Importance of Mapping the Context
    4. Drafting an Evaluation Plan
    5. Summary
    6. Conclusion
    7. Endnotes
  12. 6. Representing the Intervention
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. The Causal Model
    4. The Logic Model
    5. Use of Logic Models
    6. Different Visual Representations of the Intervention
    7. Conclusion
    8. Endnotes
  13. 7. Logic Analysis
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Foundations of Logic Analysis
    4. Types of Logic Analysis
    5. Steps for Conducting a Direct Logic Analysis
    6. Steps for Conducting a Reverse Logic Analysis
    7. Conclusion
    8. Endnotes
  14. 8. Effect Analysis and Related Approaches
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Defining Effects and Causal Relationship
    4. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Research Designs
    5. Contribution Analysis
    6. Impact Evaluation
    7. Considering Planetary Health Dimensions when Evaluating Impacts
    8. Outcome Harvesting
    9. Conclusion
    10. Endnotes
  15. 9. Implementation Analysis
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. In the Literature
    4. Implementation Analysis Questions
    5. Evaluation Designs for Implementation Analysis
    6. Impacts on Planetary Health
    7. Conclusion
    8. Endnotes
  16. 10. Economic Evaluation
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Background
    4. Types of Economic Evaluations
    5. The Comparator
    6. Cost Calculation
    7. Time Horizon
    8. Uncertainty
    9. Decision Criteria
    10. Limitations of Existing Approaches
    11. A Proposal for Useful Economic Evaluations for Planetary Health
    12. Conclusion
    13. Endnotes
  17. 11. Needs Assessment
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Defining What is, What should be and For Whom
    4. Contextual Elements and Boundaries
    5. Ex-ante and Ex-post
    6. Other important Considerations
    7. Next Steps?
    8. A Political Exercise
    9. Summary
    10. Endnotes
  18. 12. Monitoring
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Focus
    4. Establishing a Monitoring System
    5. Reporting and Other Considerations
    6. Gaming and Other Behavioural Effects
    7. Conclusion
    8. Endnotes
  19. 13. An Example: Evaluating a Local Government Official Community Plan Using Planetary Health Lenses
    1. Introduction
    2. Characterizing the OCP Within the Context of the Planetary Health Framework
    3. Data Collection
    4. Findings
    5. Recommendations
    6. Conclusion
    7. Endnotes
  20. 14. Further Thoughts and Resources
    1. Endnotes
  21. Bibliography

Exhibit 1: Principles for the development of Planetary Health Rapid Impact Assessment tools (PHRIA)

Co-design

Co-designing the tool in collaboration with targeted users ensures the assessment dimensions are contextualized according to their needs and that the language used to describe the dimensions is meaningful, understandable, and comprehensive. In addition, co-designing the tools according to the specificity of the context allows governments/organizations to address specific commitments. For example, it would be possible to develop a version specifically addressing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, if that was a priority for the organization (Green et al., 2020). However, critical dimensions for planetary health as identified in the Planetary Health Framework should all still be considered as these were identified by existing scientific knowledge.

Easy-to-use tools

In EIA and in HIA, two barriers limit their use and impact: experts are needed to conduct the study and eco-social determinants of health are not easy to understand for non-experts. As we want to encourage widespread use of PHRIA tools, a simple tool can empower people to conduct their own assessments without planetary health-related expertise or knowledge. To make the assessment exercise accessible to non-experts, PHRIA tools should include some language describing what each planetary dimension encompasses. In particular, to circumvent the difficulties experienced in HIA and EIA, it is important how the dimensions of health, equity, and power relations are described.

Deliberation and engagement

Once created, the tool should be implemented and used in deliberation with different groups such as elected officials, administrators, and decision-makers, but also diverse interest groups, such as industrial groups, Indigenous leaders, beneficiaries, and community members. Sharing the tool with a diversity of individuals and groups early in the process is a way to increase the credibility of the exercise, and to enhance deliberation around potential trade-offs. The trade-offs among which dimensions to prioritize over others wouldn’t be the result of an expert’s decision, instead this would be informed by the positions of various groups and the debate taking place. Furthermore, assessing a project using a PHRIA tool may also surface alternatives with potentially higher positive impacts for consideration. Larger participation would also help in controlling individual rating bias.

Life-cycle perspective

Finally, with the purpose of the intervention in mind, we would like to re-emphasize that all kinds of impacts on natural and human systems, in both the short and long term, should be included. In addition, the impact assessment of projects, programs or policies shouldn’t be limited to their implementation or production processes. Limiting the scope of the assessment could derail the process. Pre-selecting a stage or part of the project for evaluation purposes inevitably leads to missing the purpose of exercise itself. A life-cycle perspective should be adopted.

Source: Brousselle, A., Curren, M., Dunbar, B., McDavid, J., Logtenberg, R., & Ney, T. (2024b). Planetary Health: Creating Rapid Impact Assessment Tools. Evaluation, 30(2), 275-276, https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890241227433

Conclusion

For human beings, considering multiple dimensions at a time is a difficult exercise, and we need tools to support our reflections. The Planetary Health Rapid Impact Assessment Tool can be used to support the conceptualization of interventions, making clear what their strengths and weaknesses are. It will show trade-offs, which can lead to identifying ways to improve the intervention or compensate for negative impacts with other interventions. Furthermore, when used in a collective setting, for example with commissioners, participants, and communities, the results can help raise awareness on important topics, elucidate shared perspectives and discrepancies, fostering democratic engagement and transparency. This tool can be used at different stages of the intervention, from conception to post-implementation evaluation. It can support the drafting of comprehensive logic models and complement existing evaluation questions and methodologies.

Annotate

Next Chapter
Endnotes
PreviousNext
EPUB
This book is released under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license. This means that you are free to share and build upon the material, so long as you give appropriate credit and indicate if changes are made. You may not use the material for commercial purposes. Under this license, anyone who redistributes or modifies this book, in whole or in part, can do so for free providing they properly attribute the book as follows: Brousselle, A. (2026). Foundations of Evaluation for Planetary Health. Victoria, B.C. University of Victoria Libraries. Doi: https://doi.org/10.18357/9781550587364
Powered by Manifold Scholarship. Learn more at
Opens in new tab or windowmanifoldapp.org