The Impacts Code Steering Committee met on 18-19 June and provided detailed comments and suggestions for improving the draft before it is posted for the first formal comment period in September. Patrick and I presented two workshop sessions at the ISEAL AGM conference at Royal Holloway University (22-24 June) and received good feedback from these sessions.
Yours sincerely
Paddy Doherty
Highlights
Steering Committee meeting
There are 12 pages of notes arising from the two-day Impacts Code Steering Committee meeting. These notes range from discrete suggestions for particular passages e.g. “remove requirements for staff ToRs from 5.3.3” to broad comments on the draft e.g. “it is too long—need to remove redundant guidance”. Some important points:
- The need for consistent and understandable terminology—the draft still does not clarify the use of the term ‘assessment framework’ and how it differs from the phrase, ‘theory of change’
- The guidance document should be separate from the requirements (the guidance can change more frequently, without the need for elaborate stakeholder engagement)
- Agreement that we want to show common impact—just need to agree on the process
- Suggestion that the common indicators should be a separate process from the Impacts Code
- The issues list (Appendix A) is too biased towards agriculture
- Need more focus on the learning and improving aspects
- Agreement on a (rough) plan to assist standard systems to develop their theories of change
- Agreement that regional consultations will take place via webinars, or by providing seminars in conjunction with already existing meetings of stakeholders
- Agreement on a plan to get the draft Impacts Code ready for formal public consultation by 1 September
- Agreement on first steps to develop (and get agreement on) a set of common indicators.
Impacts Code workshops at ISEAL AGM
The two Impacts Code sessions held in conjunction with ISEAL AGM were important learning experiences for me. Most of the participants had little or no experience with the Impacts Code project, so it was a challenge for me to explain the theoretical basis for the Impacts Code, how it will be applied, and what is expected from standard systems.
During the first session Dave Mainenti (Marine Aquarium Council) helpfully volunteered for us to use his standard system as an example in a group process to articulate an impact pathway diagram. This interactive process worked well as a training tool for illustrating the theory of change concept. We were able to map a few rough impact pathways for the MAC and show the assumptions implicit in those pathways. This led to an idea of what could be measured (and where) to show contribution to impact.
During the second session Joleen Ong of Social Accountability International provided an example from the implementation of the SA8000 standard related to the elimination of child labour. The workshop group mapped the example in an impact pathway (inputs, outputs, outcomes, or impact). Once we had a rough understanding of where SAI aims to get to (goals) and their strategies to get there (inputs and outputs), we could start to see the assumptions built into the premise of their work that could be tested. The validity of these assumptions is what will need to be assessed in order to show SAI’s contribution to impact.
The salient message for me from these workshops was that I need to do more work with standards systems and other stakeholders to explain the Impacts Code. I have been working with a terrific group of impacts enthusiasts (Impacts Code committees) but they are enthusiasts, and I have lost touch with the idea that not everyone understands the abstract concepts that are important to the logic of this instrument. I intend to develop a communications plan that will make it easier for everyone to grasp the fundamentals of the Impacts Code. ISEAL is developing an Online Learning Community; and I will be able to use this as one tool (along with webinars, and in-person meetings) to reach out to the rest of the social and environmental standards movement.
Next Steps
My priority will be to integrate the recent comments and instructions into the draft Impacts Code in preparation for a Steering Committee teleconference in mid-August. I’ll be contacting ISEAL members to see if it would be possible to include an Impacts Code seminar in conjunction with some other meeting they are convening between now and December. In terms of outreach to members (particularly regarding assisting with theories of change) I’ll be looking for opportunities to increase my own understanding of theory of change in whatever training venue may be appropriate. I’ll be developing training materials for standards systems so they can educate their own members, and I’ll be hosting webinars on the draft Impacts Code.
