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.     

Methodology for environmental assessment of proposed activity using risk analysis

This study applies a process of detailed assessment to summarize the potential impact of a proposed construction or other activity on the environment before implementation of an investment plan. The aim of the study was to develop a general methodology for analysis and evaluation of environmental issues connected with planned activities and proposed projects (especially buildings and engineering constructions, required implementation of environmental impact assessment process) using a risk analysis method, thus enabling the best option among the proposed activities to be chosen. The methodology was developed for conditions in Slovakia but could be arranged for any other country considering national conditions, requirements, standards and legislative. Application of the developed methodology in environmental impact assessment could create preconditions for more effective implementation of the EIA process. This paper provides a framework for the risk analysis component of the scoping phase within the EIA process. The process outlined in this paper will assist with determination of an estimation of risks to environmental and health of proposed activities.     

Assessing corporate project impacts in changeable contexts: A human rights perspective

Project-level impact assessment was originally conceived as a snapshot taken in advance of project implementation, contrasting current conditions with a likely future scenario involving a variety of predicted impacts. Current best practice guidance has encouraged a shift towards longitudinal assessments from the pre-project stage through the implementation and operating phases. Experience and study show, however, that assessment of infrastructure-intensive projects rarely endures past the project's construction phase. Negative consequences for environmental, social and health outcomes have been documented. Such consequences clarify the pressing need for longitudinal assessment in each of these domains, with human rights impact assessment (HRIA) as an umbrella over, and critical augmentation of, environmental, social and health assessments. Project impacts on human rights are more closely linked to political, economic and other factors beyond immediate effects of a company's policy and action throughout the project lifecycle. Delineating these processes requires an adequate framework, with strategies for collecting longitudinal data, protocols that provide core information for impact assessment and guidance for adaptive mitigation strategies as project-related effects change over time. This article presents general principles for the design and implementation of sustained, longitudinal HRIA, based on experience assessing and responding to human rights impact in a uranium mining project in Malawi. The case study demonstrates the value of longitudinal assessment both for limiting corporate risk and improving human welfare.     

Environmental economic impact assessment in China: Problems and prospects

The use of economic valuation methods to assess environmental impacts of projects and policies has grown considerably in recent years. However, environmental valuation appears to have developed independently of regulations and practice of environmental impact assessment (EIA), despite its potential benefits to the EIA process. Environmental valuation may be useful in judging significance of impacts, determining mitigation level, comparing alternatives and generally enabling a more objective analysis of tradeoffs. In China, laws and regulations require the use of environmental valuation in EIA, but current practice lags far behind. This paper assesses the problems and prospects of introducing environmental valuation into the EIA process in China. We conduct four case studies of environmental economic impact assessment (EEIA), three of which are based on environmental impact statements of construction projects (a power plant, a wastewater treatment plant and a road construction project) and one for a regional pollution problem (wastewater irrigation). The paper demonstrates the potential usefulness of environmental valuation but also discusses several challenges to the introduction and wider use of EEIA, many of which are likely to be of relevance far beyond the Chinese context. The paper closes with suggesting some initial core elements of an EEIA guideline.     

Application of data envelopment analysis in environmental impact assessment of a coal washing plant: A new sustainable approach

The main problem of traditional methods of environmental impact assessment (EIA) is that in most of the existing algorithms and methods, such as Leopold, Folchi and RIAM, the main attention is to the destructive effects of the proposed plan, and the advantages of the industrial project are less noticeable. This has led to a permanent challenge between environmental organizations and industrial stakeholders. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is a new approach of assessing the industrial units. Besides, it considers the positive economic and social impacts of the project and provides a comprehensive assessment of the industrial unit. With this approach, the environmental impacts of an industrial unit have been considered as “inputs” and its positive economic and social impacts considered as the “outputs” of the DEA models. Therefore, the problem of impact assessment changes into a DEA model. In the present study, the Alborz Sharghi Coal washing plant in northern Iran has been considered as a case study for implementing the DEA-EIA approach, and 19 plant activities and 11 environmental components have been used to evaluate the environmental effects of the plant. To solve the EIA problem, two commonly used DEA approaches, called CRS (constant returns to scale) and VRS (variable returns to scale), have been used. The DEA results identified the critical environmental components of the plant that should be considered seriously. Also, drawing the “potential improvement” diagram in the DEA method is an effective tool for determining the high risk activities of the factory and applying them in development plans. Besides, using the VRS model with maximize-output approach showed that some of the plant activities had the most differences with optimal mode and these components should be considered in future development plans. Finally, it can be concluded that, assessing the environmental impacts of the mineral industries with VRS maximize-output approach, is closer to the concept of sustainable development and cost-benefit analysis.     

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.     

Assessing health consequences in an environmental impact assessment: The case of Amsterdam Airport Schiphol

In this article a comprehensive approach for the evaluation of possible health effects in an environmental impact assessment (EIA) is described, illustrated with the example of Amsterdam Airport Schiphol. Unlike many EIAs, we estimated quantitatively the impact of aircraft-related pollution in terms of the number of affected people for aircraft noise annoyance, odour annoyance and hypertension. In addition, an analysis of health registry data on cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and a short survey on annoyance and risk perception were carried out. The scope of a health impact assessment depends on the situation, available knowledge and data, concern in the population about the impact and the number of people concerned. It is important to pay attention to the perception of risks and concerns from all parties involved. Moreover, the results demonstrate that far more people outside the area for which standards apply were affected than inside.     

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.     

Framing effectiveness in impact assessment: Discourse accommodation in controversial infrastructure development

There is ongoing debate about the effectiveness of impact assessment tools, which matters both because of the threat to future practice of the tools which are frequently perceived to be ineffective, and because of the disillusionment that can ensue, and controversy generated, amongst stakeholders in a decision context where opportunities for meaningful debate have not been provided. In this article we regard debate about the meaning of effectiveness in impact assessment as an inevitable consequence of increased participation in environmental decision-making, and therefore frame effectiveness based on an inclusive democracy role to mean the extent to which impact assessment can accommodate civil society discourse. Our aim is to investigate effectiveness based on this framing by looking at one type of impact assessment – environmental impact assessment (EIA) – in two controversial project proposals: the HS2 rail network in England; and the A4DS motorway in the Netherlands. Documentary analysis and interviews held with key civil society stakeholders have been deployed to identify discourses that were mobilised in the cases. EIA was found to be able to accommodate only one out of four discourses that were identified; for the other three it did not provide the space for the arguments that characterised opposition. The conclusion in relation to debate on framings of effectiveness is that EIA will not be considered effective by the majority of stakeholders. EIA was established to support decision-making through a better understanding of impacts, so its ineffectiveness is unsurprising when its role is perceived to be broader. However, there remains a need to map discourses in different decision contexts and to analyse the extent to which the range of discourses are accommodated throughout the decision process, and the role of impact assessment in those processes, before recommendations can be made to either improve impact assessment effectiveness, or whether it is simply perceptions of effectiveness that need to be improved.