The impact matrix

The impact matrix approach involves testing sub-components of a strategic action against a series of sustainability/environmental indicators. It was originally developed for use with land use plans, which typically consist of a series of statements (policies) on e.g. location of housing, recreation etc. The matrix has indictors in the columns and policies in the rows. One person or ideally a team of several people with complementary skills fills in the matrix cell by cell. For each cell, the team asks is the impact of the policy on that indicator basically positive, negative or neutral? and puts the relevant symbol/colour in the cell. However this is only the starting point for further discussion, possibly leading to re-writing of the policy, including:

is the policy clearly written? what it will look like on the ground? does it say what it should say? if the policy is likely to have a negative impact, can this be minimised/mitigated? if the policy is likely to have a negative impact that cannot be mitigated, are other aspects of the policy so important that they override this negative impact? If so, the policy needs to be justified accordingly. If not, the policy may need to be deleted or given a major overhaul. can positive impacts of the policy be enhanced? where the impacts of the policy depend on how the policy is implemented, the symbol D (for depends) may be added, along with a note about what would need to be done to ensure that the implementation is done right. Changes resulting from the appraisal are noted in the comments column. The point of the appraisal is NOT to fill in the matrix, but rather to ensure that the policies are as good as possible. Example: The matrix below uses two different approaches to filling in the cells indicators (impacts of policy on) quality of air land use safety life, pollution comfort comments P+R land fewer clarify what to promote better in take; but fewer vehicles on means city better than vehicle city roads aim to build P+R on centre, providing movements should previously developed worse more in built-up speed up land outside parking in areas journeys provide high-speed bus city centre for all: can lanes from P+R to city

policy to promote Park-andRide at edge of city

to increase parking charges in city centre

QoL for centre P+R users be particularly improved? reduce charges for disabled people use extra revenue for public transport improvements

Advantages:

Easy to use, does not require specialist knowledge Transparent Can be used as a technique to involve the public One of the few ways of appraising policies] Incoporates perceived impacts Disadvantages:

Subjective: the involvement of different people can lead to different results Involving several people (good practice) can make the process long-winded Further information: The UK good practice guidance on sustainability appraisal of regional planning guidance.