People and the Planet 2013 Conference Proceedings

This article was first presented at the People and the Planet 2013
Conference: Transforming the Future, RMIT University, Melbourne,
Australia, 2-4 July.
All articles published in this collection have been peer reviewed.

Title: Impact Assessment: A Tool to Assist Cultural Sustainable Development

Author(s): Adriana Partal
Institution(s): RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia
Email(s): adriana.partal@gmail.com
Publisher: Global Cities Research Institute, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia
Year: 2013
Editor(s): Paul James, Chris Hudson, Sam Carroll-Bell, Alyssa Taing

Series URL:
http://global-cities.info/news-events/conferences-forums/conferences-proceedings

Copyright 2013 Global Cities Research Institute, RMIT University.

All rights reserved. This article may be used for research, teaching and
private study purposes. Material, which is reproduced from this
publication, in whole or in part, must be clearly attributed to the author
and source.


Impact Assessment: A Tool to Assist
Cultural Sustainable Development
ADRIANA PARTAL

Abstract: Impact assessments are increasingly used to understand the various

patterns of change (anticipated or created) resulting from specific interventions in
communities. To date, such assessments have tended to focus on economic,
environmental or social impacts, in sectors such as public health, education or
urban development. Despite culture being more frequently considered as a
relevant domain of public policy and sustainable development, Cultural Impact
Assessment (CIA) is not yet a well-established practice. It is not, for example,
included as a category for assessment by the International Association for Impact
Assessment (IAIA). This paper highlights the importance of culture towards
sustainable development and reports on the findings of a systematic review of
international literature on cultural impact assessment.

Keywords: Cultural Impact Assessment, sustainable development

1. Introduction

This article seeks to improve our understanding of the relationship between sustainable
development and impact assessment through the cultural domain. Impact Assessment (IA) is
not a new phenomenon. Since its inception in the late sixties, IA has become a well-
established practice across a range of sectors, such as the Environment, Economics, Social
Services and Health. However, Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) has only been used since
2002, predominantly in areas relating to indigenous issues or cultural heritage. In general,
CIA is regarded as a forward-looking tool that proactively assists decision-makers to mitigate
or avoid negative effects, and enhance positive effects pertaining to: values and beliefs, ideas
and ideologies, morals and manners, customs and traditions and other material and non-
material environments, or a combination of these.

This article deals with three interrelated questions. First, what is the role of the cultural
domain in sustainable development? Second, to what extent has the concept of culture
become salient in this topic? And finally, what is an impact assessment? Or perhaps more
concretely, what is a cultural impact assessment? To that end, the paper inquires into the
significance of CIA and assesses its value in public policy. It also examines how CIA should
be undertaken.

This article is based on an international literature review on the topic of cultural impact
assessment. Though based in Melbourne, the review utilized several electronic platforms and

A. Partal

took in articles across three languages: English, German and Spanish. An initial investigation
detailed more than seventy articles, which were then analyzed. Articles that dealt with topics
such as, cultural regeneration, economic impact, cultural capital, cultural strategies, cultural
statistics, social impact or value of culture were subsequently removed from the review
process. Only the more specific articles were analyzed in-depth. Intriguingly, only twenty-
three articles were exclusively dedicated to the topic of CIA.

This article has three broad sections. First, it introduces the topic of sustainable development,
highlighting the introduction and evolution of the cultural domain. Second, a definition of
impact assessment is presented, through which, the concept of cultural impact assessment is
also introduced. Beyond this, the public value of CIA is debated and an eight-step operational
framework is also presented.

2. Sustainability, culture and development

This section begins by establishing the theoretical relevance of the cultural domain as well as
its gradual introduction to the sustainable development discourse. This will underscore the
importance of cultural impact assessment and its public value.

2.1 Sustainable development: Background

One of the earliest definitions of sustainable developmentdevelopment that meets the

needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needswas presented in the Brundland Report of 1987 (see WCED, p. 45). In truth, this
definition was the culmination of a process that had started in 1983, when a number of
nations convened a series of meetings in order to define and pursue a common understanding
of sustainable development. These initial meetings were commissioned by the United Nations
(UN) and led to the formation of the World Commission on Environment and Development
(WCED). Shortly after, the WCED (headed by Gro Harlem Brundtland) published its
landmark report, Our Common Future, which marked the beginning and the basis of
sustainable development. The framework was established across a three-domain model:
economics, environmental and social. Despite its pioneering character however, this model
has been largely criticized.

2.2 Initial steps: Relation between culture (art) and sustainability

The first interconnections between sustainability and culture began in the late 1960s. At that
time, European art movements concentrating on ecological and environmental issues began
to emerge (Kagan 2011). Sustainability was basically understood as a concept focused on
physical ecology and environmental concerns, and rarely connected with other dimensions
such as the social or economics. Indeed, it was not until 1996 that the relationship between
art and ecology began to gain traction, when the French Comit 21, a committee for
environmental and sustainable development, organized the Villette-Amazone exhibition in
Paris. Here, projects relating to art, architecture and urban ecology were all exhibited.
Authors and artists also committed to including the concept of sustainable development in the
artistic movements of the 21st Century.

2
 A Tool to Assist Cultural Sustainable Development

2.3 Maturing the concept of culture, the new relevant domain towards sustainable
development

Culture is related to the practices and customs that both exist and have evolved over the
course of human history. Culture, it is argued, helps to explain our values, traditions, beliefs
and aspirations. Therefore, culture is much more than the arts.

According to Duxbury and Jeannotte (2010) the predominant focus on cultural considerations
regarding sustainable development was located under the umbrella of social sustainability.
Consequently, when sustainable development frameworks came to be applied in 1990s
(largely in the planning and policy sense) the cultural domain was largely omitted. However,
growing concerns around the absence of culture in the late 1990s provided the impetus for
its inclusion as a fourth pillar of sustainable development. As part of this movement, the
Melbourne based, Cultural Development Network, commissioned John Hawkes to document
The Fourth Pillar of Sustainability: Cultures Essential Role in Public Planning in 2001.

Figure 1: Four Pillars of Sustainability
Source: www.justfocus.org.nz

For the first time, there was a four-dimensional approach to defining Sustainable
Development: environmental responsibility, economic health, social equity and cultural
vitality. Progress toward a sustainable society, it was suggested, was more effective if
cultural vitality were to be included as one of the basic requirements (Hawkes 2001, p. 2). At
the same time, a major Asian based project known as the Kanazawa Initiative (200002)
began to highlight the cultural dimensions in urban planning, and criticized western
approaches of adopting a culturally oriented sustainable urbanization.

3
A. Partal

Meanwhile in Europe, a great number of actors were involved in giving weight to Cultures
inclusion in Sustainable Development. In 2002, the German Society for Cultural Policies
(KUPOGE) organized a conference to support Tutzinger Manifest, a document that called
for the integration of culture into the Agenda 21, and denounced the absence of, and
perceived disinterest in, the issue of sustainability in relation to cultural policies. The
Manifesto claimed:

If sustainability is to be attractive and fascinating, if it is to appeal to the senses

and convey a meaning, then beauty becomes an elementary component of a future
that has a future, a way of life to which all people are entitled. For the Agenda 21
to be successful it is critical to integrate participants with the ability to bring ideas,
visions and existential experiences alive in socially recognizable symbols, rituals
and practices. This increases the chance that the sustainability projectfor many
to date exclusively an environment programmewill be acknowledged as a
strategy to assure individual freedom of development for current and future
generations. The extent to which the sustainability debate is seen to take the
offensive in tackling the field of cultural practice increases public awareness,
enhances the attraction and social prestige (Projekt Kultur und Nachhaltigkeit
2001, pp. 12).

In the period 200406, a number of critical initiatives were also undertaken in English-
speaking countries, such as:

The Australian Council for the Arts including a section on ecological

sustainable development in 2004.
The New Zealand Ministry for Culture and Heritage (NZMCH) publishing
Wellness Community Indicators, which, for the first time, included
indicators relating to culture (2006)
The Integrated Community Sustainable Plans of Canada were designed and
modelled on the four pillars model.

2.3.1 The international influence on culture as a dimension to include in the public agendas
In a seemingly coordinated approach, international organizations such as United Cities and
Local Governments (UCLG) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO) took significant steps toward consolidating, and then integrating,
the cultural domain into their policy frameworks. The UCLG for instance, following a period
of discussion, approved the document, Agenda 21 for culture in 2004 at the Cultures
Forum in Barcelona. This is now widely regarding as the reference for local governments
seeking to draft cultural policy, and is largely based on the principles of cultural diversity,
human rights, participatory democracy, sustainability, peace and intercultural dialogue.
According to Kagan (2011) a wide list of principles related to culture:

Human rights: including cultural rights.

Diversity: the role of human cultural development.
Local development: highlighting multiculturalism.
Social inclusion: considering cultural activities as part of the citizenship.
Economic role of cultural industries.

Two articles of UNESCOs Convention on Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005) also

outlined the relationship between culture and sustainable development:

4
 A Tool to Assist Cultural Sustainable Development

Article 2, paragraph 6: The principle of sustainable development: the protection,

promotion and maintenance of cultural diversity are an essential requirement for
sustainable development for the benefit of present and future generations.

Article 13: The integration of culture in sustainable development: the Parties

shall endeavour to integrate culture in their policies development at all levels for
the creation of conditions conducive to sustainable development and, within this
framework, foster aspects relating to the protection and promotion of the
diversity of cultural expressions.

UNESCO and the Peoples Republic of China also hosted the conference, Culture: The Key
to Sustainable Development in May 2013, with the purpose of establishing and then
positioning culture within the United Nations post-2015 global development framework and
sustainable development goals.

3. Impact assessment, culture and sustainable development

What is culture and Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA)? What is the most suitable way to
develop an accurate framework for impact assessments on culture? In this section I will
introduce the concept of Impact Assessment and its application to the cultural domain. I will
also highlight the relevance of producing and using CIAs.

3.1 Impact assessment: Background

Over recent decades, Impact Assessments (IA) have come to be recognized as future-oriented
instruments with a capacity to advise decision-makers of what might happen if an
intervention, such as a new policy or an action, is implemented. In other words, the concept
impact is interchangeable with the concept change. Impacts are changes that are suppose
to have environmental, political, cultural, economic or social significance. As it is known,
changes can lead to a positive or negative situation. Change can therefore affect the
environment, community groups, traditions, human health and well-being, desired sustainable
objectives, or a combination of these. Considering the fact that IA has already been used for
the last forty years, it would be incorrect to categorize it as a new phenomenon. Indeed, there
is a well-established professional and mature field of IA in sectors such as the environment,
economy, social services, and to a lesser extent, health.

Following this statement, it is clear that impact assessments can be useful in designing and
implementing policies, plans, interventions, programs and projects that will face important
challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss, a growing population, urbanization,
gentrification, community cultural conflicts, loss of cultural diversity, scarce resources or
socio-cultural inequities.

According to the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) the definition of
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is the process of identifying, predicting, evaluating
and mitigating the biophysical, social, and others relevant effects of development proposals
prior to major decisions being taken and commitments made (2009, p. 1). EIA is therefore,
predictive in nature, and is largely concerned with the impact of economic activity on the
natural worldmeasured in terms of changes in economic growth, employment and wages.

5
A. Partal

By way of contrast, Social Impact Assessment (SIA) is focused on the impact of specific
interventions on organization, socials systems and individuals. Accordingly, Vanclay defines
SIA as the process of analyzing, monitoring and managing the intended and unintended
social consequences, both positive and negative, of planned interventions (ie. policies,
programs, plans, projects) and any social change processes invoked by those interventions
(DHS 2003, p. 2). Finally, Health Impact Assessment (HIA) measures change in personal
wellbeing as a result of a specific intervention. In Australia, the Victorian Minister for
Human Services has adopted the WHO European Centre for Health and Policy 1999
definition for HIA, as a combination of procedures or methods by which a policy, program
or project may be judged as to the effects it may have on the health of the population (2009,
p. 1).

Broadly speaking, EIA is considered the most powerful assessment for two reasons. Firstly, it
was the first assessment to be developed. And secondly, its existence enabled the appearance
of subsequent assessments that nowadays are considered essential.

3.2 Cultural impact assessment (CIA)

CIA is regarded as a forward-looking device that proactively assists decision-makers to

mitigate or avoid negative effects, and enhance positive effects pertaining to: values and
beliefs, ideas and ideologies, morals and manners, customs and traditions and other material
and non-material environments, or a combination of these. At first glance, it is possible to
view CIA as a subsection of social impact assessment. However, it is important to note that
SIA is related to organizations and social behavior rather than the cultural ideas and
ideologies (for example) that underpin them. That is why the added value of CIA, unlike SIA,
lies in its ability to situate itself within the cultural domain.

CIA has been in use since 2002 and has been deployed in areas relating to indigenous
communities, cultural heritage, resources management, property and state property
boundaries, and to a lesser extent, the artistic, tourist and urban planning sectors. Figure 2
highlights specific locations where CIA has been undertaken around the world. CIA has
mainly been undertaken in areas with indigenous communities such as Australia, New
Zealand, northern Japan, Hawaii and Canada.

Figure 2: Sites of Cultural Impact Assessment

6
 A Tool to Assist Cultural Sustainable Development

Despite the high-esteem in which CIA is held by stakeholders, citizens and international
organizationsthe UCLG for instanceit continues to be a largely underdeveloped and
under-utilized tool. Indeed, it is not currently included as a category by the International
Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) unlike other impact assessments such as cultural
heritage.

3.3 Public needs, public interests and public value: Significance of CIA

While acknowledging that CIA is a relatively new tool in comparison to other mature and
well-established forms of impact assessments, I argue, that it has become a tool worthy of use
by a variety of actors such as governmental institutions, individuals, communities, academics
and other organizations. By way of example, in weeks following 28 March 2013, peaceful
protests were held in the city of Istanbul, Turkey, with people demonstrating against plans to
replace Taksim Gezi Parkone of the last parks of the citywith a commercial centre, and
perhaps more broadly, the authoritarian manner in which the government had tried to execute
the project. Although there was to be an undoubted and obvious impact to the ecology of the
city, there was also to be a less obvious, though no less important, impact on the culture of
the city too. Obviously, the government did not decide to undertake a general Impact
Assessment of the proposed project.

Therefore, I can identify that the study of the impact assessment in the cultural domain is
important for four main reasons:

3.3.1 To reinforce methods for assessing sustainability

To achieve more effective sustainable development, local and national governments need a
method that allows them to consider the cultural impact of any intervention, including
intended and unintended consequences and impacts.

An excellent methodology that could be deployed here, as part of a CIA, is the Circles of
Sustainability developed by the Global Cities Research Institute at RMIT University and the
UN Global Compact Cities Programme (UNGCCP). The Circles of Sustainability process
is intended as a way of developing an interpretative description of the sustainability of an
urban region and its immediate hinterland. Here sustainability is understood in relation to
local, national, and global processes: ecological, economic, political and cultural (UNGCCP
2013). The seven perspectives of the cultural domain of the Circles of Sustainability are:
Identity and Engagement, Creativity and Recreation, Memory and Projection, Beliefs and
Ideas, Gender and Generations, Enquiry and Learning, and Health and Wellbeing.

CIA could lead us to achieve a way of establishing cultural statistics and cultural indicators
with the goal of achieving a more culturally sustainable society.

3.3.2 Legal mandates

Although CIAs can be used in anticipation of a particular development action or policy, it can
also be deployed in the cases of legal disputation. Indeed, an examination of CIA usage found
a strong correlation with cases relating to environmental and ecological law. Moreover, when
the impact of a proposed activity relates to the management of resources in indigenous
territories, the conservation of cultural heritage, or delineation between customary lands and
state property boundaries, CIA is often used to help determine legal boundaries and
requirements (Sagnia 2004).

7
A. Partal

3.3.3 Demand from stakeholders

Over the last ten years, international organizations such as IFACCA (International Federation
of Arts Councils and Culture), the Convention on Biological Diversity based in Canada,
UNESCO or UCLG have been researching issues related to operationalizing the CIA. This
challenge has been made all the more difficult by the lack of a well-established framework.
Moreover, much of the research in this area operates at a discursive levelacknowledging
the need for CIA based approaches without explaining how it is to done. Indeed, the UCLG
publication, Advice on Local Implementation of the Agenda 21 (2006) is critical of local
development initiatives for favouring economic, social and environmental assessments, over
cultural impacts. By way of response, Agenda 21, adopted article 25 which promotes the
implementation of forms of cultural impact assessment of initiatives that involve
significant changes in the cultural life of the cities. In this document, CIA is defined by
UGLG (2006) as:

[A] document that a local development project could generate in the cultural
life of a city. Given the effect that all projects can have on cultural life, it is likely
that cultural impact assessment could be considered as a process to be applied
to all policy and programme making.

While these statements are a significant step forward, they unfortunately fail to provide the
methodologies, indicators and measures stakeholders crave. This thesis therefore presents a
good opportunity to address this gap.

3.3.4 Significant outcomes

Another significant reason for developing impact assessment on culture is related to the
outcomes that it provides, for example, public participation and impact equity. From my
point of view, impact equity is one of the most significant aspects of cultural impact
assessment. To date, only one author has outlined (Sagnia 2004) this essential characteristic
factor of CIA. Sagnia mentions that by undertaking CIA, decision-makers have the
opportunity to detect who wins and who loses. But how can this be made viable? Again,
this will be explored further below.

3.4 Eight steps for impact assessment on culture

This article is based on an international literature review. Drawing on the methodologies

presented by different authors, in this section, I will develop a proposal for the application of
CIA. This proposal has been consciously designed as a first step; a framework which can be
applied and enhanced through its use in future case studies. Case studies are not only useful
for developing exploratory descriptive research but also to perform an analysis of objects and
social processes. The findings of such studies are valuable for different reasons. Firstly, they
generate knowledge about a piece of social reality, about the objects, and about other objects
with similar characteristics (Flyvbjerg 2004). In addition, the findings of the case studies can
be taken as a point of contrast to other research, in order to check to what extent they are
valid and generalizable (Coller 2005). This means that case studies are not only useful for
generating hypotheses, but also confirming and proving them. In short, the ability to
generalize from a case depends on how it has been chosen and constructed.

8
 A Tool to Assist Cultural Sustainable Development

Here, I present an empirically grounded system (comprising eight steps) based on the
methodologies proposed by Gibson (et al. 2008), Glicken (2002), Holden (2004):

Determine project type: Choose an intervention, knowing the stage in the

project cycle. This intervention can be a new policy, project, plan or any
change from the local or national government.
Identify cultural values: This step should seek to examine the principles of
characterization and cultural values, as outlined by Holden (2004). They are
divided into historical, social, symbolic, aesthetic and spiritual.
Identify cultural impact assessment variables: This step should take into
consideration the variables presented by Sagnia (2004) that are related to
cultural life (eg. verbal expressions, tangible expressions, values systems,
beliefs, etc.), cultural institutions and organizations, and cultural resources
and infrastructures.
Data collection: Here public participation is crucial. Participatory
techniques ranging from, advisory groups, community forums, interviews,
participation-observation, questionnaires and surveys should be used.
Plans for gaps in data: I agree with Sagnia (2004) that no impact assessment
on culture collects all the required data. In this situation, CIA should
honestly identify gaps in its database information and subsequently develop
further strategies.
Impact prediction: According to Gybson (et al. 2008), in this stage, it is
important to focus on the tangible and quantitative data, analyze multiple
attributes, and create hypothesis workshops, etc.
Evaluate significance: It is important to evaluate the projects potential
impact, in terms of it affect on nature, magnitude, duration, etc.
Identification of how to mitigate the negative effects or how to enhance the
positive ones: In this last stage the creation of good indicators, not only
quantitative but also qualitative ones are essential.

Conclusions

Two questions help to identify the contribution of this article. First, why are CIAs important
to creating a sustainable future? And second, what does the in-depth analysis of the literature
teach us about the use of CIA?

In responding to the first, this article has demonstrated that Culture is related to the
practices and customs that exist and have evolved over the course of human history.
Furthermore, culture can be used as a way of explaining the values, traditions, beliefs and
aspirations that underpin human behaviournot just our artistic pursuits. Another important
point is to realize that CIA is not an assessment of cultures impactas many studies in the
cultural sector tends to describe itbut an assessment of how a particular activity will impact
on culture. Consequently, the use of CIA has been dominated by projects involving
indigenous cultural heritage and indigenous issues, such as resource management, property
and state property boundaries. To a lesser extent its use can also be found in tourism, art and
urban planning.

9
A. Partal

In responding to the second of these two questions, it is equally demonstrable that due to the
non-inclusion of CIA in IAIAs methodologies, some gaps and common issues have
emerged. For instance:

Around 69 per cent of the international literature does not include a

definition of culture. Consequently, around 60 per cent of these articles do
not give a systematic definition of the concept cultural impact assessment.
More than the half of the articles reviewed in detail, analyze the use of CIA
without providing clear definitions, measures, methodologies or indicators.
There is a clear mix between CIA and Cultural Heritage Impact
Assessment.
Most of the time CIA is regarded as a subsection of EIA or to a lesser
extent SIA.

The concept of culture is in general, imprecise and fluid; there is no consensus as to what
CIA really means. Therefore, CIA tends to be used in order to position and reaffirm political
goals and values.

Finally, this article has developed an eight-step process for operationalizing CIA. These steps
have been designed with the academic contributions of the main authors dealing with cultural
value and CIA. However, as has been highlighted, the majority of CIA use is connected to
indigenous and heritage issues. Therefore, an important future line of research would be to
apply CIA in urban areas.

For the first time in human history, more than half of the worlds total population lives in
urban areas or cities. According to UN-Habitat (2009), 60 per cent of the world population
will be living in urban areas by the year 2030. With such a scenarioincreasing
urbanization, irregular economic development, migration and the use of limited resourcesit
is essential that the 21st century provide liveable cities capable of assessing and sustaining
their unique ways of being: their culture.

I am optimistic that research into these dynamics will produce valuable knowledge, as well as
inform the management practices that take account of such knowledge.

Acknowledgements

This paper is based on the findings of the research project Cultural Impact Assessment: a
literature review, which was coordinated by John Smithies and Kim Dunphy from the
Cultural Development Network (CDN). The research was funded by CDN and Global Cities
Research Institute (RMIT University); Paul James, the Director, also contributed with
significant suggestions. I would like to thank the three anonymous referees for their helpful
comments on earlier versions of this paper. Any errors or omissions in this essay remain my
responsibility alone.

10
 A Tool to Assist Cultural Sustainable Development

References
Australia Council for the Arts (2004), Arts and Wellbeing, ACA, Sydney.
Coller, X. (2005), Estudios de Casos, CIS, Madrid.
Department of Human Services (DHA) (2009), Health Impact Assessment: Experiences and
Insightsin Local Government, State Government of Victoria, [online],
<http://www.health.vic.gov.au/regions/southern/downloads/Intro-to-HIA.pdf>.
Duxbury, N. and Jeannotte, S. (2010), Culture, Sustainability, and Communities: Exploring
the Myths, Oficina do CES no. 353, Coimbra, Portugal.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2004), Cinco malentendidos acerca de la investigacin mediante los estudios
de caso, REIS, vol. 106, no. 4, pp. 3362.
Gibson, G., OFaircheallaigh, C. and MacDonald, A. (2008), Integrating Cultural Impact
Assessments into development Planning, International Organisation for Impact Assessment,
Canada.
Glicken, J. (2002), Social, Cultural, Economic Impact Assessment: A Literature Review,
Galisteo Consulting Group, US.
Hawkes, J. (2001), The Fourth Pillar of Sustainability: Cultures Essential Role in Public
Planning, Common Ground, Melbourne.
Holden, J. (2004), Capturing Cultural Value, DEMOS, London..
International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) (2008), What is Impact Assessment?,
[online], <http://www.iaia.org/publicdocuments/special-publications/What is IA_web.pdf>.
International Network for Cultural Diversity (INCD) (2004), Framework for Cultural Impact
Assessment, Sydney, [online], <http://www.incd.net/docs/ciaframework.htm>.
Kagan, S. and Kirchberg, V. (2008), Sustainability: A New Frontier for the Arts and
Culture,Verlag fr Akademische Schriften, Frankfurt am Main.
Kagan, S. (2011), Art and Sustainability: Connecting Patterns for a Future of Complexity,
Transcrip, Bielefeld.
Akw: Kon Guidelines (2004), Voluntary Guidelines for the Conduct of Cultural,
Environmental and Social Impact Assessments Regarding Developments Proposed to Take
Place on, or Which are Likely to Impact on, Sacred Sites and on Lands Waters Traditionally
Occupied or Used by Indigenous and Local Communities, Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity, Montreal.
New Zealand Ministry for Culture and Heritage (NZMCH) (2006), Cultural Well-being and
Local Government. Report 1: Definition and Context of Cultural Well-being, Wellington.
Sagnia K. B. (2004), Framework for Cultural Impact Assessment, Senegal.
Projekt Kultur und Nachhaltigkeit (2001), Tutzinger Manifesto for the Strengthening of the
Cultural-aesthetic Dimension of Sustainable Development, Kulturpolitische Gesellschaft,
[online], <http://www.kupoge.de/ifk/tutzinger-manifest/pdf/tuma-gb.pdf>.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) (2005),

Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions,
[online], <http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-
URL_ID=31038&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html>.

11
A. Partal

UN Habitat (2009), Urbanization: Facts and Figures, [online],

<http://www.unhabitat.org/mediacentre/documents/backgrounder5.doc>.
United Cities and Local Governments (2006), Advice on Local Implementation of the Agenda
21 for Culture, Barcelona City Council.
United Nations Global Compact Cities Program (UNGCCP) (2013), Circles of Sustainability
Urban Profile Process, [online], <http://citiesprogramme.com/archives/resource/circles-of-
sustainability-urban-profile-process>.
Vanclay, F. (2003), Social Impact AssessmentInternational Principles. Special Publications
Series No. 2, International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA), Fargo.
World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987), Report of the World
Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, also known as the
Brundtland Commission, United Nations, [online], <http://www.un-documents.net/wced-
ocf.htm>.

12