Social impact assessment and stakeholder engagement in the Russian Federation: Representativeness,deliberativeness and influence

We analyse two approaches to social impact assessment (SIA) – traditional SIA and participatory SIA – in the context of a large project in the Russian Federation. The key difference between these approaches is the level and depth of stakeholder engagement in the impact assessment process and project. Participatory SIA seeks to observe the three principles of participatory democracy: representativeness, deliberativeness and influence. We identify the requirements for stakeholder engagement in the Russian impact assessment process, and analyse implementation practice by reviewing the stakeholder engagement activities undertaken for the South Stream gas pipeline project, according to national requirements and international best practice (e.g. the International Finance Corporation Performance Standards). We conclude that the Russian process reflects traditional SIA. Its main weaknesses are poor stakeholder identification and planning of engagement activities. The Russian SIA/EIA process is not consistent with the principles of representativeness, deliberativeness and influence and does not enable people to adequately participate in or influence decision-making.     

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.     

Assessing the performance of SIA in the EIA context: A case study of South Africa

This article, a theoretical perspective based on a literature study, is a critical evaluation of SIA as part of the EIA process in South Africa against the background of international guidelines and best practices. It includes sections on the historical background of the development of SIA in South Africa, the legal status and requirements of SIA in the country, and a critical evaluation of SIA regulation in South Africa. The conclusion reached in the article is that the persistent problems of SIA practice, experienced in other parts of the world, are also evident in South Africa. Apart from institutional, financial and professional constraints, there are also serious problems associated with approach and methods. This conclusion confirms the findings of empirical studies that SIA in South Africa is neglected, that the practice of SIA in South Africa is not yet on a sound footing, and that it does not receive the professional attention it deserves in a country beset by enormous social challenges. To conclude the article recommendations are made to improve the level of SIA practice in South Africa, and the possible significance of this national case study for international practice is indicated.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

A research framework for studying social impacts: Application to the field of mining

Given the growing amount of attention shown to the social dimension of natural resources and mining governance, there is a need for more informed research-oriented approaches to studying social impacts. This article analyzes the features of Social Impact Assessment (SIA) studies from the academic research perspective and presents a framework for social impact research. By academic research, the article refers to studies on social impacts conducted purely for research purposes, not impact assessment processes.Research is always one aspect of the SIA process. At the same time, there is a lack of general methodological literature offering guidance on how assessing social impacts can contribute to social studies research. The guiding documents on SIA are largely intended for practical-level planning and management processes, which limits their applicability for academic purposes. The proposed framework draws both from traditional social science methods and existing scholarly and guiding literature on SIA. The research framework consists of four interlinked phases: 1) research preparations, 2) background studies (including proposed project, national and local context), 3) fieldwork, and 4) analysis. The framework is designed to direct attention to the relevant aspects of research methods, theory building, fieldwork implementation, and research choices for data analysis. Thus, the framework provides a flexible, but comprehensive, multi-level approach for examining social impacts, which can be adapted for a wide range of social-scientific mining research. The analysis and developed framework will help academic researchers better study the social impacts of mining and make better use of existing SIA studies in academic life.     

Four conceptual issues to consider in integrating social and environmental factors in risk and impact assessments

In the last twenty years, both the increase in academic production and the expansion of professional involvement in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Social Impact Assessment (SIA) have evidenced growing scientific and business interest in risk and impact analysis. However, this growth has not brought with it parallel progress in addressing the main shortcomings of EIA/SIA, i.e. insufficient integration of environmental and social factors into development project analyses and, in cases where the social aspects are considered, technical-methodological failings in their analysis and assessment. It is clear that these weaknesses carry with them substantial threats to the sustainability (social, environmental and economic) of projects which impact on the environment, and consequently to the local contexts where they are carried out and to the delicate balance of the global ecosystem. This paper argues that, in a sociological context of complexity and dynamism, four conceptual elements should underpin approaches to socio-environmental risk and impact assessment in development projects: a theoretical base in actor–network theory; an ethical grounding in values which are internationally recognized (though not always fulfilled in practice); a (new) epistemological-scientific base; and a methodological foundation in social participation.     

Incorporating supra-local social structure into social impact assessment using causal network analysis

This paper discusses the incorporation of supra-local social structure (SLSS) analysis into social impact assessment (SIA) practice in order to afford a deeper and more complex understanding of the social production of the impacts of planned interventions. We define SLSS as the total set of political, economic, socio-cultural and ideological driving forces and external structural phenomena shaping the social vulnerability of affected communities. We advocate causal network analysis for effectively incorporating SLSS into SIA and we take the conflict over the HydroAysén project in Chilean Patagonia as an empirical case study. While previous applications have interpreted planned interventions as the root cause of impacts, this paper analyses the dialectical interaction of four elements: the SLSS, the local community, the planned intervention and its impacts. This application revealed two fundamental issues. First, on a theoretical-conceptual level, it showed the capacity of SLSS to mould the causal pathways of a project's impacts on the affected community. Second, on an applied level, it enabled identification of the elements that should be addressed to facilitate social management of the project.     

System dynamic simulation: A new method in social impact assessment (SIA)

Many complex social questions are difficult to address adequately with conventional methods and techniques, due to the complicated dynamics, and hard to quantify social processes. Despite these difficulties researchers and practitioners have attempted to use conventional methods not only in evaluative modes but also in predictive modes to inform decision making. The effectiveness of SIAs would be increased if they were used to support the project design processes. This requires deliberate use of lessons from retrospective assessments to inform predictive assessments. Social simulations may be a useful tool for developing a predictive SIA method. There have been limited attempts to develop computer simulations that allow social impacts to be explored and understood before implementing development projects. In light of this argument, this paper aims to introduce system dynamic (SD) simulation as a new predictive SIA method in large development projects. We propose the potential value of the SD approach to simulate social impacts of development projects. We use data from the SIA of Gareh-Bygone floodwater spreading project to illustrate the potential of SD simulation in SIA. It was concluded that in comparison to traditional SIA methods SD simulation can integrate quantitative and qualitative inputs from different sources and methods and provides a more effective and dynamic assessment of social impacts for development projects. We recommend future research to investigate the full potential of SD in SIA in comparing different situations and scenarios.     

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.     

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.     

A study of exposure standards in Russia and the role of occupational hygiene

This paper is the result of an investigation carried out in February 1997, which set out to learn about the development and application of occupational health standards, and in turn approaches to occupational environmental monitoring, in Russia, and to see how these were similar to, or different from, what takes place in other countries. The enquiry involved face-to-face meetings with senior Russian occupational health scientists and officials. It was confirmed that Russian occupational exposure standards are very stringent and provide a very high level of protection of workers. However, they are difficult to enforce, and it is suggested that the development of a strong and distinctive occupational hygiene discipline and profession in Russia would provide a "bridge" to enable more effective implementation and interpretation of those standards.     

Integrating Impacts into Adaptation Measures

A mechanism has been established to improve integration of international climate-related programmes. Known as the Climate Agenda it outlines a programme, that in a cost-effective way, responds to national obligations to respond to international agreements as well as their national needs for social and economic development. The paper briefly describes the Climate Agenda and the incorporation within it of studies of climate impact assessments and response strategies to reduce vulnerability. The need for increased emphasis on climate impact assessment and for the development of effective adaptation measures is emphasised following the elaboration of a Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). UNEP's efforts to identify national programmes contributing to the Climate Agenda are described.The response from developing countries has, however, been very disappointing, even from countries where we know work is ongoing through funding by GEF or US Country Studies Program and other bilateral programmes. Initial compilation of information available so far shows that many developed countries are putting a lot into the area of impact assessment of not just climate change, but also climate variability. There remain some research gaps, especially in the area of assessment of climate impacts on ecosystems, hydrological systems, etc. Considerable efforts are presently being directed at reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases and in the case of developing countries, most efforts are being directed towards completing national communications and providing baseline data for future studies.The paper refers to early activities by UNEP in cooperation with other international organizations to undertake integrated assessments of the impacts of climate change on important socio-economic sectors and the later incorporation of lessons learned into the IPCC Guidelines for Assessing Impacts of Climate Change.Later sections outline the development of a handbook on methods for climate change impact assessment and adaptation strategies as a practical approach to national assessments and the development of appropriate and cost-effective response to climate change.The initiation of a GEF-funded project to apply the methods contained in the handbook and improve the results based on national studies is also described for both developed and developing countries.Working in collaboration with a team of international experts under the coordination of the Institute of Environmental Studies at Vrije University (Amsterdam), the goal of this ongoing project is to develop a valuable methodological tool that Parties to the UNFCCC may apply to develop national climate change impact and adaptation assessments. Development of these guidelines was linked to a series of country studies in Antigua and Barbuda, Estonia, Cameroon and Pakistan funded under a UNEP/GEF project. The application of the first version of the UNEP Handbook by national study teams in these four countries is making valuable technical and practical contributions and will ensure that the next version of the Handbook will be a more useful tool for experts in developing countries undertaking similar studies in the future. The methods contained in the Handbook are also the basis for similar assessments funded under bilateral development programmes in other countries. These and similar studies elsewhere are coordinated with the UNEP programme and will eventually aim to create reliable and comparable assessments, a compatible set of tools for such purpose and the identification of realistic adaptation options for incorporation into national planning for adapting to climate change. The paper also addresses how climate impact assessment and response strategies are undertaken as part of national enabling activities carried out in co-operation with UNEP.     

Advancing strategic environmental assessment in the offshore oil and gas sector: Lessons from Norway,Canada, and the United Kingdom

Abstract: Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) for offshore oil and gas planning and development is utilized in select international jurisdictions, but the sector has received limited attention in the SEA literature. While the potential benefits of and rationale for SEA are well argued, there have been few empirical studies of SEA processes for the offshore sector. Hence, little is known about the efficacy of SEA offshore, in particular its influence on planning and development decisions. This paper examines SEA practice and influence in three international offshore systems: Norway, Atlantic Canada and the United Kingdom, with the intent to identify the challenges, lessons and opportunities for advancing SEA in offshore planning and impact assessment. Results demonstrate that SEA can help inform and improve the efficacy and efficiency of project-based assessment in the offshore sector, however weak coordination between higher and lower tiers limit SEA's ability to influence planning and development decisions in a broad regional environmental and socioeconomic context.     

Social impact assessments: Developing a consolidated conceptual framework

Social Impact Assessments (SIAs) have played an increasingly important role in the conduct of planned interventions, providing proponents the capacity to assess and manage the social consequences of their activities. Whilst the SIA field has experienced significant conceptual and practical development over the last decade, efforts at consolidating this within one framework have been limited. In this paper, we incorporate this new knowledge by redeveloping and thus updating the SIA procedural framework developed by Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment. In doing so, this updated procedural framework has attempted to incorporate current ‘best practice’ that focuses on participatory approaches to undertaking an SIA. This involved making adaptions to two steps, expansions to five steps, integration of a stronger participatory approach to six steps, and the development of a new step, Management and Evaluation reflecting moves towards ex-post use of SIA processes. It is hoped that this consolidation of the literature of a decade's worth of key findings in SIA research will lead to further efforts towards a meta-evaluation of SIA literature and a platform from which newer developments may be further investigated.     

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.     

An evaluation of a risk-based environmental regulation in Brazil: Limitations to risk management of hazardous installations

The environmental regulation of hazardous projects with risk-based decision-making processes can lead to a deficient management of human exposure to technological hazards. Such an approach for regulation is criticized for simplifying the complexity of decisions involving the economic, social, and environmental aspects of the installation and operation of hazardous facilities in urban areas. Results of a Brazilian case study indicate that oil and gas transmission pipelines may represent a threat to diverse communities if the relationship between such linear projects and human populations is overlooked by regulatory bodies. Results also corroborate known challenges to the implementation of EIA processes and outline limitations to an effective environmental and risk management. Two preliminary topics are discussed to strengthen similar regulatory practices. Firstly, an effective integration between social impact assessment and risk assessment in EIA processes to have a more comprehensive understanding of the social fabric. Secondly, the advancement of traditional management practices for hazardous installations to pursue a strong transition from assessment and evaluation to management and control and to promote an effective interaction between land-use planning and environmental regulation.