Practice Of Social Impact Assessment Research Articles

Streamlining social impact assessment and disaster risk assessment for the 21st century – Perspectives from South Africa

Despite considerable improvements in social impact assessment practice, the shortfalls and neglected status of social impact assessment persist. Integrated impact assessments have been suggested to address some of these shortcomings. Due to its transdisciplinary nature, disaster risk assessment has been identified as an emerging area that could assist social impact assessment in managing social changes and risks and improving community resilience. Emerging research from South Africa and abroad have shown that social impact assessment–disaster risk assessment integration offers opportunities for streamlining and improved practice across four areas, that is, theoretical discourses, legislative and statutory provisions, practitioner perspectives and combined methodologies. The resulting streamlined social impact assessment and disaster risk assessment will be more suitable for 21st-century challenges, allowing for enriched social impact assessment practice, contributions to social sustainability and strengthening of the social resilience of at-risk communities. From observations of the South African context, we suggest that streamlined social impact assessment and disaster risk assessment will optimally address the challenges of developing sustainably and enhancing the resilience of at-risk societies in the 21st century in South Africa, the global south and also the rest of the world.

Integrating risk assessment for increased social resilience: Lessons from South Africa

AbstractAmidst the increased exposure of vulnerable communities to disaster risks in recent years, the optimal use of Social Impact Assessment (SIA) for effective risk reduction, enhanced social resilience, and a more sustainable human environment is essential. The limited flexibility of SIA methodological guidance is a potential obstacle to optimal practice, particularly in developing countries with complex social contexts, such as South Africa. In this article, the potential integration of SIA with aspects of Disaster Risk Assessment (DRA) for improved practice is explored by evaluating commonalities and differences in South African SIA and DRA methodological guidelines in comparison with international good practice guidelines. While South African SIA guidance is in line with international good practice, definite shortcomings were observed, such as the absence of risk assessment guidance. The findings suggest that the incorporation of DRA has the potential to strengthen risk assessment in SIA practice through an integrated approach to social risk baseline studies. SIA and DRA practice communities will benefit from this integrated approach, and thereby contribute to improved social resilience, all of which should contribute to sustainable development outcomes, especially in hazard influenced contexts.

Using news coverage and community-based impact assessments to understand and track social effects using the perspectives of affected people and decisionmakers

This paper applies an innovative approach to monitoring social effects occurring before and during construction of two hydroelectric dams in Canada. The two studied dams, Site C and Keeyask, are under construction in Canada and underwent community-based impact assessment (CBIA). News coverage and the CBIA documents were analyzed to understand and compare how those two groups perceive social effects induced by the two projects. CBIAs contain concerns expressed by affected people, whereas news coverage can include quotes from both affected people and decisionmakers involved in the assessment process. By contrasting these datasets, we found that the documents are complementary: while CBIAs are comprehensive in assessing community concerns, news outlets can reveal how those concerns evolved throughout different phases of the projects' implementation. This approach fills a gap in SIA around monitoring of key social effects around local conflicts and disputes, psychosocial effects, socioeconomic effects, and cumulative effects on a daily life. Furthermore, by contrasting the views identified within the impact assessments and the media, the study demonstrates how specific concerns diverged: affected people focus on local social effects while decisionmakers' interests lie in a broader political perspective grounded in local sacrifices ‘for the good of the whole province’. Our analysis emphasizes the role of political power over decision making that can inhibit CBIA and social impact assessment practice from contributing to socially sustainable projects.

Social impact assessment - is it possible challenge for social enterprise?

Social enterprises from government, society, and financiers are under increasing pressure to demonstrate their social impact. To do this, social enterprises need to implement social impact assessments in their organizations. It is noteworthy that there are many different methods and tools for impact assessment and measurement, which often make it unclear to social enterprise managers what is best for their enterprise. Also, many social impact assessment and measurement methodologies are complex enough and require specific competencies, time, and other extra costs. However, social impact assessment is an essential process, as it helps to build trust in these organizations by the public, state institutions and investors, to ensure the transparency of their activities and to meet their goals. Social enterprises are a new phenomenon in the Baltic States, so it is essential to clarify the attitude of the leaders of the organization to the social impact assessment and what practices they use in their organizations. Aim of the research: to explore the existing practice of social impact assessment of social enterprises in the Baltic states. The methodology of research: 20 in depth interviews with the jure and the facto WISE´s managers in the Baltic states were conducted.

Challenges in meeting international standards in undertaking social impact assessment in Russia

Implementing good practice social impact assessment (SIA) that meets international standards in countries in transition is problematic. We reflect on the challenges faced when undertaking SIA in the Russian Federation. These challenges restrict meaningful SIA processes from being undertaken and limit public participation and the effective community engagement of project-affected local people. Based on the self-reflexive professional experience of two Russian-based social practitioners, and their discursive interactions with two leading academics in environmental and social impact assessment, as well as on in-depth interviews with prominent Russian and international experts, we identified the key challenges that prevent effective SIA from being implemented in Russia: a lack of understanding of the international standards; discrepancy in the determination of the social area of influence between the national requirements and international standards; difficulties in combining national and international impact assessment processes; and a tendency by companies to restrict stakeholder engagement to the minimum. We hope that by having an awareness of these limitations, improvements to SIA practice in Russia and elsewhere will be made.

Forces for change in social impact assessment

ABSTRACT Social impact assessment (SIA) is experiencing both evolutionary and revolutionary forces for change. Using the example of New South Wales, Australia, forces for change include community pressure and shifting expectations, industry desire for clarity and certainty, departmental leadership, a collaborative approach to policy development, and perceived legitimacy of the guideline itself. Inhibiting these forces are general resistance to change, a concern around costs of good SIA, unfamiliarity with social sciences, and insufficient practitioner capacity. The recent Rocky Hill judgement, which highlights concepts such as community cohesion, sense of place, and distributive equity, may accelerate change. However, there is also a need to build capacity among SIA practitioners, and afford sufficient time and budget to meet the standard of leading-practice guidelines. At the same time, unfolding trends such as the climate change and extinction crises, the gendered nature of development, ever-widening inequalities, and ‘post-truth’ discourses may catalyse more revolutionary change in SIA practice – changes that paradoxically may enable SIA to reclaim its social-science principles and the overarching goal of sustainable social development.

The community cost of consultation: Characterising the qualitative social impacts of a wind energy development that failed to proceed in Tasmania, Australia

Energy developments affect communities in a range of ways. Impacts on communities can be caused by changes to landscape amenity and access, disruptions to community cohesion, increased or decreased income streams, effects on property values, and population changes. These changes are ideally captured in the social impact assessment (SIA) process, where proponents outline in a formal statement the balance of benefits and burdens on local communities, and measures that will be taken to minimise negative outcomes for the community. In SIA practice there is a tendency toward quantitative socio-economic impacts, such as changes to demographics, income, and land values, with some qualitative assessment of amenity impacts. While the academic literature promotes inclusion of changes to the community itself, such as impacts on community cohesion and social capital, these qualitative changes are not consistently evident in SIA practice. Additionally, SIA practice assesses the impacts of the project, i.e. how the development of wind turbines or other energy infrastructure will affect the community. Because the consultation process around a proposed project typically commences prior to the characterisation and assessment of any associated social impacts and the finalisation of the SIA process, the potential impacts of this consultation are rarely, if ever, evaluated. Here, we examine a case study of an Australian wind energy project that did not proceed to implementation. Through this case study we are able to analyse the anticipatory impacts of the proposal; those stemming from the consultative process rather than the development of the project itself. We present these qualitative social changes, and outline the pathways through which the social changes manifest in two overarching social impacts: a divided community and future development capacity. We discuss the implications of this analysis in the context of good engagement practice and energy governance.

Developing social impact assessment guidelines in a pre-existing policy context

ABSTRACTFew jurisdictions have translated internationally agreed social impact assessment (SIA) principles into statutory provisions. Governments and regulatory bodies tend to provide developers with high-level frameworks, or require that social impacts be ‘considered’, without specifying how this is to be done. In Australia, this lack of clarity leaves all parties uncertain about requirements for SIA. The New South Wales (NSW) Government’s 2017 release of the SIA guideline for State-significant mining, petroleum and extractive industry development represents an attempt to clarify requirements and provide guidance. In this paper, we describe the process of bringing this guideline to fruition from the perspective of being directly involved in its development, and highlight the challenges involved in integrating leading-practice principles into the state’s pre-existing policy framework. While the guideline represents a significant advance in policy-based SIA guidance, some aspects leave room for improvement. The real test of the guideline’s impact will lie in its influence on SIA practice in NSW, and ultimately in social outcomes for communities affected by resources projects.

Online retail of alcohol, some dilemmas for professional SIA practice

Online retail is burgeoning, challenging ‘bricks and mortar’ retailers and changing both purchase and retail distribution practices in many countries. At the same time, this growth is challenging some established social impact assessment (SIA) frames of reference, creating new dilemmas for professional SIA practice. This paper examines some of these dilemmas as they are revealed in decisions published by the NSW Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority in the calendar year 2017.

What do social entrepreneurs need to walk their talk? Understanding the attitude–behavior gap in social impact assessment practice

The topic of social impact assessment (SIA) is growing in importance, and this is especially true for social enterprises. The mission of solving social problems is the main feature of these organizations; thus, the need to assess the extent to which this mission is fulfilled becomes essential. The purpose of this paper is to propose a conceptual model that could explain the attitude–behavior gap in SIA practice through the development of a coherence/displacement matrix, to gauge if social entrepreneurs are coherent in “walking their talks.” The study is based on a mixed‐methods approach focused on the Italian context. An empirical quantitative analysis has been performed to identify the misalignment between attitude and behavior. The gaps that emerged are then analyzed through in‐depth interviews with social entrepreneurs, to provide a pilot case study that could test the model and gain further insights into how those gaps could be filled.

Can social impact assessment contribute to social development outcomes in an emerging economy?

Social impact assessment (SIA) addresses the ‘people aspect’ of development-induced change by empowering communities with a voice in the environmental impact assessment process. Globally, poverty and inequality is growing. Countries with emerging economies are especially affected, and SIA conducted within this context necessitates mitigation of both the direct impacts of particular developments as well as the social legacies that entrench poverty and inequality. Social development is an approach that can be used to reduce poverty and inequality. This paper analyses the practice of SIA and its potential to contribute to social development outcomes in emerging economies. SIA, as practised in South Africa, was analysed from the theoretical framework of social development using an exploratory sequential mixed methods design. The findings indicate that weak implementation of mitigation, monitoring and management measures dilute the potential for SIA to achieve social development outcomes. Through minor evolution of SIA practice, the process can lay a firm foundation to facilitate social development outcomes, especially considering its potential contribution to poverty reduction through the social protection floor, skills development and job creation.

Digital archives, big data and image-based culturomics for social impact assessment: Opportunities and challenges

Social impact assessment (SIA) is well-established but uses conventional approaches that have become less effective in recent decades, particularly in relation to declining survey response rates and a lack of youth engagement. Images from digital archives and social media sources are poised to advance the research and practice of SIA by transcending text-based methods with insights into changing landscapes, and human engagement with them. This viewpoint describes progress, challenges and cautions toward the development of such tools (defined as culturomics), using hydroelectricity cases to illustrate potential approaches. These tools build on foundational work in a range of disciplines, including the humanities and computer science. We describe necessary advances in machine learning, image digitization, and data aggregation and visualization techniques, as well as ways to ensure that such tools are carefully tested, applied and interpreted. Challenges include the automation, acquisition and management of datasets, and using these tools appropriately and equitably. Critically, culturomics of any kind must not be used as a replacement for engagement with people, but as complementary to inclusive stakeholder engagement.

Social relations: A critical reflection on the notion of social impacts as change

This article seeks to reflect upon the dominant conception of social impacts as the change produced by development projects and programs, and the ways in which those affected perceive and experience them. Identifying change may be a necessary but not sufficient step in acknowledging the complexity of social life. Engaging with critical scholarship produced in the fields of both social impact assessment (SIA) and of the social studies of technical/planned interventions, I discuss how the understanding of social impacts as change responds ultimately to a causal–instrumental logic that, in order to make sense of the complexity of social life, tends to reduce it to a series of variables and matrices. I suggest a complementary dialectical approach focusing on social relations. This approach, allows an alternative means of analysing social impacts concerning the way policies and projects reconfigure conditions and possibilities on a societal level. To accomplish this, and in order to go beyond the sequence of potential impacts (or changes) and their generic indicators, I propose a set of analytical questions that highlight how social relations are structured. Besides, on the assumption that development is both a form of governance and a space of contestation, negotiation, and activism, this approach may contribute to further the potential for reflection and mobilisation that the practice of SIA presents.

Measuring Value Creation in Social Enterprises

The relationship between business and community is becoming increasingly important, especially with the current blurring of the boundaries between profit and not-for-profit sectors, and the growing number of hybrid organizations such as social enterprises. For these organizations, the assessment of social impact plays a strategic role in helping them understand to what extent their social mission has been accomplished. As a result of increasing interest in the practice of Social Impact Assessment (SIA), many models have been developed, but a system to classify them is still lacking, and so the overall picture remains rather fragmentary if not confusing. In this research, a hierarchical cluster analysis was developed based on a sample of 76 SIA models to group them in macro-categories and help social entrepreneurs choose the model that is best suited to the needs of their organization.

Social impact assessment and ethical research principles: ethical professional practice in impact assessment Part II

This paper considers a range of ethical issues in social impact assessment (SIA) providing a commentary from a professional practice perspective. Drawing on its companion paper (Vanclay et al. 2013 Principles for ethical research involving humans: Ethical professional practice in impact assessment Part I. Impact Assess Proj Appraisal, 31(4):243–253), the 18 principles of ethical research are discussed as they pertain to SIA practice. While the ethical principles are highly relevant and align well with good practice SIA, there will be situations where the specific requirements suggested by the principles need to be carefully thought through by practitioners. Although making some general conclusions, the paper’s main purpose is to stimulate further debate about ethical issues within the impact assessment profession. Key recommendations that emerge for SIA practice include the need for SIA practitioners to use information sheets routinely, and to increase the use of signed consent forms. It is also recommended that the International Association for Impact Assessment provide a service to allow practitioners to gain ethical approval for their projects in non-routine cases.

A critical analysis of the SIA process in Turkey: current problems and recommendations for improving the practice of SIA

This article assesses the quality of the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) process in Turkey through an exploration of the legal status and practical dimensions of SIA. We examined a randomly selected sample of SIAs, implemented in 67 development and investment projects between 1993 and 2011, using non-mandatory indicators of quality assessment. We found that, although this period has seen substantial improvements in the legal status of SIA and some improvement in certain dimensions of SIA in practice, much remains to be done in respect to international principles, guidelines and best practices. In practice, SIA is often considered an informational and consultation activity to be fulfilled during the public participation meeting. Moreover, in most cases mechanisms of impact identification/prediction and mitigation/monitoring exist only in theory. On the basis of these findings and assessment of relevant legislation, we offer some recommendations to improve the SIA process in Turkey in hopes that an understanding of the problems plaguing SIA in practice renders these recommendations appropriate to other contexts as well.

Little by little, inch by inch: Project expansion assessments in the Papua New Guinea mining industry

Social impact assessment (SIA) has traditionally been practiced as an ex-ante predictive tool in the context of regulatory approval by government agencies. This model of SIA developed by Burdge and others is based on ‘greenfields’ development, of a new project going in to areas where there are no, or relatively few, similar types of development. The International Principles of SIA signalled a conceptual shift in the practice of SIA where greater emphasis is placed on the assessment and management of social issues across the life-cycle of developments. In addition forms of cumulative impact assessment have been developed for contexts where more than one project is likely to impact on populations or communities. With these changes to the traditional models of impact assessment there is a need to clarify how and when dedicated phases of ‘assessment’ might be undertaken over the life-cycle of a development. In the context of the mining industry, SIAs are increasingly required by governments for incremental increases in the size or impact of these operations. This paper reviews the development and application of Project Expansion Assessments (PEAs) for two large-scale mining operations in Papua New Guinea. It argues that a different set of assumptions need to underlie the model of IA for such assessments, with more emphasis on trajectories rather than baselines, a critical evaluation and attribution of effects, and the incorporation of adaptive management tools into the process.

Social Theory, Impact Assessment and Northern Native Communities

Many of Canada's native Indian and Inuit commumties are located in northern areas experiencing increasing pressures for resource extraction. Various analyses of the probable conse­ quences of major northern projects have disclosed fundamental conflicts between the hinterland native population and Canada's majority society, as represented by metropolitan business and government interests. These conflicts derive in part from disagreements over resource ownership and the proper beneficiaries of economic rents, as well as from widely disparate social values placed on the resource base. In this article we review the historical evolution of social impact assessment (SIA) as it has developed in response to such resource related conflicts. Then we go on to propose a general conceptual model of social and economic relations which could help provide a more adequate theoretical basis for SIA practice. While the approach suggested here focuses on the needs of native Canadian communities, it may also be relevant for other fourth world peoples and regional minorities.

Social impact assessment: the state of the art

Social impact assessment (SIA) is now conceived as being the process of managing the social issues of development. There is consensus on what ‘good’ SIA practice is – it is participatory; it supports affected peoples, proponents and regulatory agencies; it increases understanding of change and capacities to respond to change; it seeks to avoid and mitigate negative impacts and to enhance positive benefits across the life cycle of developments; and it emphasizes enhancing the lives of vulnerable and disadvantaged people. We analyse the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats facing SIA. We assert that the SIA community needs to revisit core concepts, such as culture, community, power, human rights, gender, justice, place, resilience and sustainable livelihoods. It is incumbent on SIA practitioners to educate proponents, regulators and colleagues about these concepts, and to embed them into practice norms. Stronger engagement with the emerging trends of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC); human rights impact assessment; social performance standards; supply chain management; governance; local content and economic development will improve the relevance and demonstrable value of SIA to all stakeholders.

Evaluating the use of Social Impact Assessment in the context of agricultural development projects in Iran

The utilisation of Social Impact Assessment (SIA) in Iran is analysed in terms of its policy context and its application in practice. Five case studies where SIA was employed in conjunction with Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) for agricultural development projects are evaluated. In addition, the performance of the policy context is assessed. This research revealed that there are legal and institutional constraints to the effective functioning of SIA in Iran, and that there are deficiencies in the operating guidelines. There were serious problems associated with the way SIA was undertaken in all five case studies. Recommendations to improve the policy framework for the conduct of SIA are made. The recommendations advocate for a higher profile of SIA within legislation, for social issues to have greater emphasis in official guidelines for the conduct of EIA and SIA, and for a range of measures to increase the professionalism of SIA practice.