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.     

Social Impact Management Plans: Innovation in corporate and public policy

Social Impact Assessment (SIA) has traditionally been practiced as a predictive study for the regulatory approval of major projects, however, in recent years the drivers and domain of focus for SIA have shifted. This paper details the emergence of Social Impact Management Plans (SIMPs) and undertakes an analysis of innovations in corporate and public policy that have put in place ongoing processes – assessment, management and monitoring – to better identify the nature and scope of the social impacts that might occur during implementation and to proactively respond to change across the lifecycle of developments. Four leading practice examples are analyzed. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards require the preparation of Environmental and Social Management Plans for all projects financed by the IFC identified as having significant environmental and social risks. Anglo American, a major resources company, has introduced a Socio-Economic Assessment Toolbox, which requires mine sites to undertake regular assessments and link these assessments with their internal management systems, monitoring activities and a Social Management Plan. In South Africa, Social and Labour Plans are submitted with an application for a mining or production right. In Queensland, Australia, Social Impact Management Plans were developed as part of an Environmental Impact Statement, which included assessment of social impacts. Collectively these initiatives, and others, are a practical realization of theoretical conceptions of SIA that include management and monitoring as core components of SIA. The paper concludes with an analysis of the implications for the practice of impact assessment including a summary of key criteria for the design and implementation of effective SIMPs.     

Integrating community perceptions and cultural diversity in social impact assessment in Nigeria

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Act of 1992 aimed to make the environment a central theme in development in Nigeria. Nevertheless, the extent of engagement with local cultures in the Nigerian EIA process is not statutorily guaranteed. While most EIAs in Nigeria have been for oil and gas projects in the Niger Delta, and have focused strongly on the biophysical environment, socio-economic and cultural aspects have remained marginal. The palpable neglect of community perceptions and cultural diversity in social impact assessment (SIA) in this region prone to conflict has tended to alienate the people in the decision-making process. Thus, despite claims to compliance with regulatory requirements for EIAs, and numerous purported sustainable development initiatives by international oil companies (IOCs), the region continues to face multiple sustainability challenges. This paper situates local perceptions and cultural diversity in participatory development and canvasses the integration of community perceptions and cultural diversity into SIA in the Niger Delta region. It is argued that doing this would be critical to ensuring acceptance and success of development actions within the context of local culture while also contributing to sustainable development policy in the region.     

The assessment of aesthetic and perceptual aspects within environmental impact assessment of renewable energy projects in Italy

The main aim of this paper is to explore how perceptual and aesthetic impact analyses are considered in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), with specific reference to Italian renewable energy projects. To investigate this topic, the paper starts by establishing which factors are linked with perceptual and aesthetic impacts and why it is important to analyze these aspects, which are also related to legislative provisions and procedures in Europe and in Italy. In particular the paper refers to renewable energy projects because environmental policies are encouraging more and more investment in this kind of primary resource. The growing interest in this type of energy is leading to the realization of projects which change the governance of territories, with inevitable effects on the landscape from the aesthetic and perceptual points of view. Legislative references to EIA, including the latest directive regarding this topic show the importance of integrating the assessment of environmental and perceptual impacts, thus there is a need to improve EIA methodological approaches to this purpose. This paper proposes a profile of aesthetic and perceptual impact analysis in EIA for renewable energy projects in Italy, and concludes with recommendations as to how this kind of analysis could be improved.     

Environmental impact assessment system in Thailand and its comparison with those in China and Japan

This paper aims to find ways to streamline the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) system in Thailand to increase its effectiveness by comparative analysis with China and Japan. This study is mainly focused on review, update and comparison of EIA systems between these three countries. It is intended to clarify fundamental information of the EIA systems and characteristics of the key elements of EIA processes (screening, consideration of alternatives, prediction or evaluation of impact, and public participation). Moreover, the number of the EIA projects that have been implemented in all the provinces in Thailand are presented. The results identified the similarities and differences of the EIA processes among the three aforementioned countries. The type of EIA report used in Thailand, unlike those in China and Japan, is an Environmental and Health Impact Assessment (EHIA), which is concerned with the health and environmental impacts that could occur from the project. In addition, EIA reports in Thailand are made available to the public online and the shortcomings of the process have details of barriers resulting from the projects to help future projects with reconsideration and improvements. In this study, it is pointed out that Thai's EIA system still lacks local EIA authority which needs to be empowered by implementing a set of laws or ordinance.     

Adapting social impact assessment to address a project's human rights impacts and risks

We address the weaknesses inherent in the social risk assessments undertaken for business, especially in the extractive industries. In contrast to the conventional approach that considers consequence to the company rather than to impacted communities, conformance with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights requires that consequence to affected communities has precedence. In order for social risks to be properly assessed, we consider that: companies need to know and understand the human rights impacts of their activities; contemporary approaches to project impact and risk assessment need to be adapted to consider human rights; and environmental impact assessment (EIA) and social impact assessment (SIA) methods need to be adapted to give greater attention to impacts on human rights. Using an example from the mining, oil and gas sector, we provide a method that differentiates social risks from business risks, and we position impact assessment as an instrument that actively facilitates the improved identification, analysis and management of social risks. Practical adaptations to SIA activities and risk assessment processes are provided. Taking human rights impacts into account and using the dimensions of gravity, extent, vulnerability and remediability, we nominate criteria to assess the significance of negative social impacts.     

Can we infer about ecosystem services from EIA and SEA practice? A framework for analysis and examples from Portugal

Biodiversity, soil, water, air, climate, landscape and other components are typically analyzed in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) when looking for the effects of a given project on the biological and ecological components of the environment. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) tends to follow the same general pattern, when looking for the environmental effects of plans and programs. In both cases, ecosystem services are often not explicitly considered. We developed a framework to analyze environmental assessment (EA) practice and infer about ecosystem services based on existing evidence from EIA and SEA reports and supporting information. Our framework addresses the relations between ecosystem services and the environmental factors assessed in EIA and SEA, considering the relevant conceptual frameworks such as the ES cascade model and the DPSIR framework applied to ES provision. We base our proposals on results from a preliminary meta-analysis of recent EIA and SEA reports from several types of plans and projects in Portugal, in which implicit assessments of ES were clearly predominant. We discuss the implications of those results and the opportunities to infer about ecosystem services, and conclude on the need for more dedicated and explicit efforts to ecosystem services assessment in EIA and SEA.     

Project justification and EIA: Anything goes?

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) incorporates environmental aspects into decision-making, but sometimes it is not effective in rejecting projects with dubious justification, significant impacts and little social utility, especially when they have political support. EIA is expected to achieve sustainable development, but without calling development into question; however, it should be able to ask the question of whether development is really necessary. Although EIA is political, as a part of the decision-making process, politicization must be limited to prevent it from becoming a mere instrument for giving an “environmental veneer” to development. Some measures thar can help avoid unjustified projects are: adopting administrative justice approach to EIA; minimising politicization of EIA agencies; improving transparency in decision-making and proportionality of EIA procedures; carrying out pre-feasibility studies; increasing the scope of SEA; allowing more than one SEA or EIA procedure for the same development throughout the planning process; strengthening the justification of the project in EIA documents; or making the scoping phase mandatory at least for major projects.     

The application of Geographical Information Systems to determine environmental impact significance

This paper presents a new methodology for impact assessment—SIAM (Spatial Impact Assessment Methodology)—which is based on the assumption that the importance of environmental impacts is dependent, among other things, on the spatial distribution of the effects and of the affected environment. The information generated by the use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) in impact identification and prediction stages of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is used in the assessment of impact significance by the computation of a set of impact indices. For each environmental component (e.g., air pollution, water resources, biological resources), impact indices are calculated based on the spatial distribution of impacts. A case study of impact evaluation of a proposed highway in Central Portugal illustrates the application of the methodology and shows its capabilities to be adapted to the particular characteristics of a given EIA problem.     

Large-scale renewable energy project barriers: Environmental impact assessment streamlining efforts in Japan and the EU

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) procedures have been identified as a major barrier to renewable energy (RE) development with regards to large-scale projects (LS-RE). However EIA laws have also been neglected by many decision-makers who have been underestimating its impact on RE development and the stifling potential they possess. As a consequence, apart from acknowledging the shortcomings of the systems currently in place, few governments momentarily have concrete plans to reform their EIA laws. By looking at recent EIA streamlining efforts in two industrialized regions that underwent major transformations in their energy sectors, this paper attempts to assess how such reform efforts can act as a means to support the balancing of environmental protection and climate change mitigation with socio-economic challenges. Thereby this paper fills this intellectual void by identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the Japanese EIA law by contrasting it with the recently revised EIA Directive of the European Union (EU). This enables the identification of the regulatory provisions that impact RE development the most and the determination of how structured EIA law reforms would affect domestic RE project development. The main focus lies on the evaluation of regulatory streamlining efforts in the Japanese and EU contexts through the application of a mixed-methods approach, consisting of in-depth literary and legal reviews, followed by a comparative analysis and a series of semi-structured interviews. Highlighting several legal inconsistencies in combination with the views of EIA professionals, academics and law- and policymakers, allowed for a more comprehensive assessment of what streamlining elements of the reformed EU EIA Directive and the proposed Japanese EIA framework modifications could either promote or stifle further RE deployment.     

A framework for combining social impact assessment and risk assessment

An increasing focus on integrative approaches is one of the current trends in impact assessment. There is potential to combine impact assessment with various other forms of assessment, such as risk assessment, to make impact assessment and the management of social risks more effective. We identify the common features of social impact assessment (SIA) and social risk assessment (SRA), and discuss the merits of a combined approach. A hybrid model combining SIA and SRA to form a new approach called, ‘risk and social impact assessment’ (RSIA) is introduced. RSIA expands the capacity of SIA to evaluate and manage the social impacts of risky projects such as nuclear energy as well as natural hazards and disasters such as droughts and floods. We outline the three stages of RSIA, namely: impact identification, impact assessment, and impact management.     

Application of network method as a tool for integrating biodiversity values in Environmental Impact Assessment

Highway construction or expansion projects are among major activities of economic development especially in developing countries. However, road development consistently can lead to major damages to the environment, including habitat fragmentation and ecological instabilities and a considerable threat to fauna and flora. At this point, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in road developments is needed to address and evaluate the ecological issues in decision-making. The object of this study is to strengthen the consideration of ecological issues, i.e., biodiversity in the existing EIA tools. This paper regards a network method as a means to make informed planning decisions by the lessons from a case study. The results indicate that network method is well suited to be applied in ecological impacts assessment. However, some limitations such as complexity and time consumed make casual networks unpopular. Also, impact of traffic noise on acoustic communication (wildlife and human) was performed. It has been shown that sound level for human is much higher than admissible standards. Finally, the study expresses some mitigation measures to improve the acquisition for environmental impact assessment process.     

A multi-scale metrics approach to forest fragmentation for Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment

Forests are becoming severely fragmented as a result of land development. South Korea has responded to changing community concerns about environmental issues. The nation has developed and is extending a broad range of tools for use in environmental management. Although legally mandated environmental compliance requirements in South Korea have been implemented to predict and evaluate the impacts of land-development projects, these legal instruments are often insufficient to assess the subsequent impact of development on the surrounding forests. It is especially difficult to examine impacts on multiple (e.g., regional and local) scales in detail. Forest configuration and size, including forest fragmentation by land development, are considered on a regional scale. Moreover, forest structure and composition, including biodiversity, are considered on a local scale in the Environmental Impact Assessment process. Recently, the government amended the Environmental Impact Assessment Act, including the SEA, EIA, and small-scale EIA, to require an integrated approach. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to establish an impact assessment system that minimizes the impacts of land development using an approach that is integrated across multiple scales.This study focused on forest fragmentation due to residential development and road construction sites in selected Congestion Restraint Zones (CRZs) in the Greater Seoul Area of South Korea. Based on a review of multiple-scale impacts, this paper integrates models that assess the impacts of land development on forest ecosystems. The applicability of the integrated model for assessing impacts on forest ecosystems through the SEIA process is considered.On a regional scale, it is possible to evaluate the location and size of a land-development project by considering aspects of forest fragmentation, such as the stability of the forest structure and the degree of fragmentation. On a local scale, land-development projects should consider the distances at which impacts occur in the vicinity of the forest ecosystem, and these considerations should include the impacts on forest vegetation and bird species. Impacts can be mitigated by considering the distances at which these influences occur. In particular, this paper presents an integrated environmental impact assessment system to be applied in the SEIA process. The integrated assessment system permits the assessment of the cumulative impacts of land development on multiple scales.     

Determining Vulnerability Importance in Environmental Impact Assessment: The case of Colombia

The concept of vulnerability has been used to describe the susceptibility of physical, biotic, and social systems to harm or hazard. In this sense, it is a tool that reduces the uncertainties of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) since it does not depend exclusively on the value assessments of the evaluator, but rather is based on the environmental state indicators of the site where the projects or activities are being carried out. The concept of vulnerability thus reduces the possibility that evaluators will subjectively interpret results, and be influenced by outside interests and pressures during projects. However, up until now, EIA has been hindered by a lack of effective methods. This research study analyzes the concept of vulnerability, defines Vulnerability Importance and proposes its inclusion in qualitative EIA methodology. The method used to quantify Vulnerability Importance is based on a set of environmental factors and indicators that provide a comprehensive overview of the environmental state. The results obtained in Colombia highlight the usefulness and objectivity of this method since there is a direct relation between this value and the environmental state of the departments analyzed.     

EIA training courses organized by the centre for environmental management and planning,University of Aberdeen: An analysis of experience

In 1980, the World Health Organization (Regional Office for Europe) invited The Centre for Environmental Management and Planning (CEMP) to organize a two-week training course on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to provide a comprehensive introduction to EIA with emphasis on methods and techniques for impact identification, prediction and assessment. Not suprisingly the topic of environmental health impact assessment was to be a major focus. Since 1980, the course has been held each year at the University of Aberdeen. An analysis of participation in the course during its first five years yields several impressions about the success of this training effort and the ways in which it might be improved.     

Health impact assessment and health equity in sub-Saharan Africa: A scoping review

BackgroundNatural resource extraction projects can have positive but also negative effects on the health of affected communities, governed by demographic, economic, environmental, physical and social changes. Negative effects often prevail and these might widen existing health inequities. Health impact assessment (HIA) is a decision-support tool that aims at maximizing benefits and minimizing negative impacts on people's health. A core value of HIA is equity; yet, little is known about health equity in the frame of HIA, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.MethodologyWe conducted a scoping review to determine whether and to what extent HIA in sub-Saharan Africa addresses health equity. We included peer-reviewed publications and guidelines pertaining to HIA, environmental impact assessment (EIA) and social impact assessment (SIA). Health equity was investigated by identifying (i) how health considerations were addressed and (ii) whether health was stratified by subgroups of the community.ResultsOut of 1′640 raw hits, we identified 62 articles (16 HIA, 36 EIA, one SIA and nine integrated assessments), 32 of which specifically addressed health. While 20 articles focused on a specific health topic, 12 articles used a more comprehensive approach to address health. In 15 articles there were specific subgroup analyses (e.g. mothers, children or marginalized groups) as a measure of health equity. Another 12 papers referred to the community in a more general way (e.g. affected). Without exception, health was an integral part of the nine included guidelines. HIA guidelines addressed health systematically through environmental health areas, risk assessment matrix or key performance indicators.ConclusionsWe found evidence that previously conducted HIA in sub-Saharan Africa and current guidelines address health equity. However, there is a need to stratify community subgroups more systematically in order to determine health differentials better. Future HIA should consider community heterogeneity in an effort to reduce health inequities by “leaving no one behind”, as suggested by the Sustainable Development Goals.     

Land take and the effectiveness of project screening in Environmental Impact Assessment: Findings from an empirical study

Land take is emerging as a global environmental concern, and is particularly critical in intensively developed and land-scarce regions. This paper seeks to understand the effectiveness of the screening stage of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in addressing land take. Screening is the stage where a decision is made as to whether an EIA is required for a project. In many jurisdictions, screening results in three pathways: full EIA directly, preliminary EIA only, or preliminary EIA followed by full EIA. We compared the land take of 217 projects triggering the different pathways in a study region in Italy over a 15-year time interval. Land take was quantified by overlaying the footprint of the projects with a land cover map.The results show that while more attention was given to projects with larger land take impacts overall, the cumulative land take from smaller projects not triggering full EIA was considerable (40% of overall land take). The case-by-case examination conducted through the preliminary EIA was found to work better for some project types (ski areas and small urban development), than for others (quarries). Our findings lead us to advocate improvements in current screening procedures to ensure that the land take impacts are quantified and made explicit in preliminary EIA reports. Our evidence-based approach to determining land take in EIA provides a compelling basis for understanding ways to improve EIA policies, guidance and practice.     

Revealing EIA process-related barriers in transport projects: The cases of Italy,Portugal, and Spain

The effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in the transport field is increasingly being contested. Apart from technical issues (e.g., impacts measurements), the literature highlights process-related barriers as key obstacles to effective EIA implementation in transport projects (e.g., lack of collaborative work, transparency, etc.). Nevertheless, most academic efforts to date have focused on technical improvements, paying limited attention to the relevance of process-related barriers. To address this shortcoming, the paper aims to explore and compare how EIA is experienced and perceived by professionals in three South-European countries (Italy, Portugal, and Spain), providing additional insights into EIA process-related barriers in transport projects. The findings were obtained through an online survey of 294 professionals, representing two main stakeholder groups: environmental consultants and transport planners. The results reveal four main types of process problems shared in all three countries: (i) EIA timing, (ii) assessment of alternatives, (iii) monitoring system, and (iv) public participation. The highest divergences are seen in Spain, where 42% of identified process-related barriers are shared with the rest of countries, while Italian and Portuguese respondents agree in the perception of 68% of process-related barriers. The main differences between the barriers identified by transport planners and environmental consultants are related to their assessment of the need for more collaborative work between key actors. It is finally discussed the added value of this research to progress towards the homogenization of EIA processes across countries.     

SHARE IT: Co-designing a sustainability impact assessment framework for urban food sharing initiatives

Urban food systems must undergo a significant transformation if they are to avoid impeding the achievement of UN Sustainable Development Goals. One reconfiguration with claimed sustainability benefits is ICT-mediated food sharing – an umbrella term used to refer to technologically-augmented collective or collaborative practices around growing, cooking, eating and redistributing food – which some argue improves environmental efficiencies by reducing waste, providing opportunities to make or save money, building social networks and generally enhancing well-being. However, most sustainability claims for food sharing have not been evidenced by systematically collected and presented data. In this paper we document our response to this mismatch between claims and evidence through the development of the SHARECITY sustainability Impact assessment Toolkit (SHARE IT); a novel Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) framework which has been co-designed with food sharing initiatives to better indicate the impact of food-sharing initiatives in urban food systems. We demonstrate that while several SIA frameworks have been developed to evaluate food systems at the urban scale, they contain few measures that specifically account for impacts of the sharing that initiatives undertake. The main body of the paper focuses on the co-design process undertaken with food sharing initiatives based in Dublin and London. Attention is paid to how two core goals were achieved: 1) the identification of a coherent SIA framework containing appropriate indicators for the activities of food sharing initiatives; and 2) the development of an open access online toolkit for in order to make SIA reporting accessible for food sharing initiatives. In conclusion, the co-design process revealed a number of technical and conceptual challenges, but it also stimulated creative responses to these challenges.