The social impact assessment model and the planning process

Social impact assessment developed along with environmental impact assessment during the early 1970s as a methodological tool with which to better understand the consequences of environmental alteration and as an input to environmental impact statements. The idea was that if adverse social, economic, and physical effects of development were known in advance, they could either be mediated or eliminated.For the most part, the assessment of biological and economic impacts has become a required input into every stage in the planning process. However, social changes are not always arrayed alongside economic, biological, and landuse changes in the matrix that leads to the final decision.The major difficulty in the application of SIA process has been in identifying and measuring the social impacts that occur with each project. Even if important social impacts were identified, few procedures have been developed for measuring their significance. When either social costs or benefits to local communities are arrayed against regional and national economic goals, social concerns generally finish a distant second. Social science research must establish that the effects on human populations alone are significant enough to alter the outcome of the decision process.     

Understanding why impact assessment fails; a case study of theory and practice from Wafi-Golpu,Papua New Guinea

From an instrumental or management perspective, impact assessment (IA) is a process of identifying impacts, finding solutions and achieving project approval. A recipient community, however, has a completely different perspective. For them the IA is about living with impacts, individually and collectively, perhaps over generations, and contested processes of self-determination, consultation and exclusion. IA practitioners live in a third space, usually bound to the proponent but also aware of responsibilities to communities and eco-systems. Seeking to better understand how IA is practiced and experienced, we explore the proposed Wafi-Golpu mine, located in the Morobe Province of Papua New Guinea. Determinably focused on local effects we situate the proposed mine within the context of the national mining experience and discuss how IA practices see local and/or Indigenous communities. We find that the Wafi-Golpu IA is blind to local ways of being and seeing the world, with an opaque and arbitrary assessment that reflects its technical and Western basis and bias. We finish with observations about the proposed Wafi-Golpu mine and IA that is relevant to the approval process, as well as making a decolonial, Southern contribution to IA theory and practice, extractive industry regulation and mining-affected communities elsewhere.     

Opening new institutional spaces for grappling with uncertainty: A constructivist perspective

In the context of an increasing reliance on predictive computer simulation models to calculate potential project impacts, it has become common practice in impact assessment (IA) to call on proponents to disclose uncertainties in assumptions and conclusions assembled in support of a development project. Understandably, it is assumed that such disclosures lead to greater scrutiny and better policy decisions. This paper questions this assumption. Drawing on constructivist theories of knowledge and an analysis of the role of narratives in managing uncertainty, I argue that the disclosure of uncertainty can obscure as much as it reveals about the impacts of a development project. It is proposed that the opening up of institutional spaces that can facilitate the negotiation and deliberation of foundational assumptions and parameters that feed into predictive models could engender greater legitimacy and credibility for IA outcomes.     

Post-project analysis: The use of a network diagram for environmental evaluation of the Barekese Dam, Kumasi, Ghana

The paper presents an evaluation of post-project impacts of the Barekese Dam on three riparian communities downstream about 30 years after its construction. A network diagram, which incorporated a mathematical model, was used for impact identification and analysis. The expected environmental impacts, expressed as quantitative weighted impact scores, showed that the dam appeared to have exerted adverse impacts on the environmental quality of the communities. The impacts in the communities, however, increased with relative distances away from the dam and the river suggestive of cumulative impacts transmitted downstream. Strategic measures for improving environmental quality of the communities have been given.     

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.     

A Strategic Project Appraisal framework for ecologically sustainable urban infrastructure

Actors in the built environment are progressively considering environmental and social issues alongside functional and economic aspects of development projects. Infrastructure projects represent major investment and construction initiatives with attendant environmental, economic and societal impacts across multiple scales. To date, while sustainability strategies and frameworks have focused on wider national aspirations and strategic objectives, they are noticeably weak in addressing micro-level integrated decision making in the built environment, particularly for infrastructure projects. The proposed approach of this paper is based on the principal that early intervention is the most cost-effective and efficient means of mitigating the environmental effects of development projects, particularly macro infrastructure developments. A strategic overview of the various project alternatives, taking account for stakeholder and expert input, could effectively reduce project impacts/risks at low cost to the project developers but provide significant benefit to wider communities, including communities of future stakeholders. This paper is the first exploratory step in developing a more systematic framework for evaluating strategic alternatives for major metropolitan infrastructure projects, based on key sustainability principles. The developed Strategic Project Appraisal (SPA) framework, grounded in the theory of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), provides a means of practically appraising project impacts and alternatives in terms of quantified ecological limits; addresses the neglected topic of metropolitan infrastructure as a means of delivering sustainability outcomes in the urban context and more broadly, seeks to open a debate on the potential for SEA methodology to be more extensively applied to address sustainability challenges in the built environment. Practically applied and timed appropriately, the SPA framework can enable better decision-making and more efficient resource allocation ensuring low impact infrastructure development.     

Monitoring: The missing piece: A critique of NEPA monitoring

The U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 heralded in an era of more robust attention to environmental impacts resulting from larger scale federal projects. The number of other countries that have adopted NEPA's framework is evidence of the appeal of this type of environmental legislation. Mandates to review environmental impacts, identify alternatives, and provide mitigation plans before commencement of the project are at the heart of NEPA. Such project reviews have resulted in the development of a vast number of reports and large volumes of project-specific data that potentially can be used to better understand the components and processes of the natural environment and provide guidance for improved and efficient environmental protection. However, the environmental assessment (EA) or the more robust and intensive environmental impact statement (EIS) that are required for most major projects more frequently than not are developed to satisfy the procedural aspects of the NEPA legislation while they fail to provide the needed guidance for improved decision-making. While NEPA legislation recommends monitoring of project activities, this activity is not mandated, and in those situations where it has been incorporated, the monitoring showed that the EIS was inaccurate in direction and/or magnitude of the impact. Many reviews of NEPA have suggested that monitoring all project phases, from the design through the decommissioning, should be incorporated. Information gathered though a well-developed monitoring program can be managed in databases and benefit not only the specific project but would provide guidance how to better design and implement future activities designed to protect and enhance the natural environment.     

Not so Black and White: environmental justice and cumulative impact assessments

A growing number of scientific studies in recent years have investigated disparate exposure to ecological hazards in American society. Working from an environmental justice perspective, this body of research consistently reveals that poor communities of color are most likely to bear a disproportionate burden of negative externalities. These studies utilize a wide range of research methodologies, including various indicators of ecological hazards (e.g., proximity to waste sites, industrial emissions, ambient air quality), but few, if any, utilize composite measures to approximate cumulative environmental impact. Consequently, the environmental justice (EJ) literature is characterized by a failure to effectively measure overall impact from an extensive range of ecological hazards. Limitations on available data make this a serious problem for present and future studies. We argue that cumulative measures of environmental impact can play an important role in furthering our understanding of environmental injustices in the United States. In this study of Massachusetts, we develop and implement such a cumulative measure of negative environmental impacts. By controlling for the density and severity of ecological hazardous sites and facilities within every community in the state, we demonstrate that exposure patterns take a generally linear distribution when analyzed by race and class. So, while our results reaffirm previous findings that low-income communities and communities of color bear significantly greater ecological burdens than predominantly White and more affluent communities, our findings also suggest that environmental injustices exist on a remarkably consistent continuum for nearly all communities. In other words, as the minority population and lower-income composition of a community increases, correspondingly, so does cumulative exposure to environmental hazards. In this respect, communities which are more racially mixed and of moderate income status that are not typically identified as meeting EJ criteria (in demographic terms) also face more significant ecological hazards. Thus, the strict bifurcation of communities into categories of Environmental Justice and Non-Environmental Justice is problematic, and poses a serious dilemma for policy makers, public health officials, and community activists. To overcome this challenge requires the adoption of a cumulative environmental justice impact assessment (CEJIA), which in addition to the demographic characteristics of a community, also takes into account the total environmental burden and related health impacts upon residents. Furthermore, through the adoption of the precautionary principle, source reduction, and alternative forms of “cleaner” production, environmental justice advocates must work for policies which reduce the environmental threat for the full range of communities, as well as their own.     

Social cost in construction projects

Despite the fact that completion of construction projects has a direct positive impact on the growth of national and local economies as well as humans' wellbeing, construction projects, especially in the urban areas, generate serious environmental nuisances for the adjacent residents and have unintentional adverse impacts on their surrounding environment. Construction causative adverse impacts on the neighbouring communities are known as the social costs. This study aims to present a state-of-the-art overview of social costs in construction industry in terms of definition, consideration, classification and quantification. Furthermore, it is aimed to bring the construction social cost phenomenon for the agenda of Environmental Impact Assessors.     

Social impacts of earthquakes caused by gas extraction in the Province of Groningen,The Netherlands

Gas extraction from the Groningen gasfield in the northern Netherlands has led to localised earthquakes which are projected to become more severe. The social impacts experienced by local residents include: damage to property; declining house prices; concerns about the chance of dykes breaking; feelings of anxiety and insecurity; health issues; and anger. These social and emotional impacts are exacerbated by the increasing distrust Groningen people have towards the national government and the gas company, NAM, a partnership between Shell and ExxonMobil. The earthquakes have reopened discussions about the distribution of benefits from gas production and the extent to which benefits are retained locally. Mitigation of the impacts is attempted, but the lack of trust decreases the effectiveness of the mitigation measures. The extent of this experience of previously-unforeseen, unanticipated impacts suggests that a new social and environmental impact assessment needs to be undertaken, and a new Social Impact Management Plan (SIMP) and Impacts and Benefits Agreement (IBA) developed, so that the project can regain its legitimacy and social licence to operate. In addition to conventional gas, this paper has wider relevance for unconventional gas developments, for example shale gas extraction by hydraulic fracturing methods (fracking).     

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.     

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.     

A review of uncertainty research in impact assessment

This paper examines uncertainty research in Impact Assessment (IA) and the focus of attention of the IA scholarly literature. We do so by first exploring ‘outside’ the IA literature, identifying three main themes of uncertainty research, and then apply these themes to examine the focus of scholarly research on uncertainty ‘inside’ IA. Based on a search of the database Scopus, we identified 134 journal papers published between 1970 and 2013 that address uncertainty in IA, 75% of which were published since 2005. We found that 90% of IA research addressing uncertainty focused on uncertainty in the practice of IA, including uncertainty in impact predictions, models and managing environmental impacts. Notwithstanding early guidance on uncertainty treatment in IA from the 1980s, we found no common, underlying conceptual framework that was guiding research on uncertainty in IA practice. Considerably less attention, only 9% of papers, focused on uncertainty communication, disclosure and decision-making under uncertain conditions, the majority of which focused on the need to disclose uncertainties as opposed to providing guidance on how to do so and effectively use that information to inform decisions. Finally, research focused on theory building for explaining human behavior with respect to uncertainty avoidance constituted only 1% of the IA published literature. We suggest the need for further conceptual framework development for researchers focused on identifying and addressing uncertainty in IA practice; the need for guidance on how best to communicate uncertainties in practice, versus criticizing practitioners for not doing so; research that explores how best to interpret and use disclosures about uncertainty when making decisions about project approvals, and the implications of doing so; and academic theory building and exploring the utility of existing theories to better understand and explain uncertainty avoidance behavior in IA.     

Fragmentary provisions for uncertainty disclosure and consideration in EA legislation,regulations and guidelines and the need for improvement

The consideration and disclosure of uncertainties is fundamental to a credible EA process, but little is known about the nature and type of requirements and guidance available to proponents, practitioners and decision makers about how to deal with uncertainties. This paper examines the provisions for considering and disclosing uncertainties in EA. Methods are based on a comparative review of uncertainty provisions in EA legislation, regulations and guidance documents under Canadian federal, provincial and territorial jurisdictions. Results show 10 types of provisions applied at different stages of the EA process with considerable jurisdictional variability and incoherence. The most common provision was that decision makers can request that project proponents provide more information, followed by the preparation of contingency plans, and that practitioners document their assumptions about data reliability. Most of these provisions were found in guidelines, versus legislation or regulations; and most addressed impact management, with very few provisions for addressing uncertainty during EA review and decision making. Current practices of uncertainty (non)disclosure and (non)consideration in EA can be explained, in part, by the superficial nature and limited extent of the requirements and guidance made available to EA practitioners, proponents, and decision makers. The existing requirements placed on proponents and practitioners to disclose and consider uncertainties are necessary, but insufficient. Stronger, more coherent and transparent requirements for those tasked with EA review and decision making to consider uncertainty information when disclosed, and the development of practical guidance on how to do so, are needed.     

Environmental impacts of decommissioning: Onshore versus offshore wind farms

Increasing concerns over climate change have prompted rapid growth of renewable energy over the past few decades, particularly wind energy. However, as the installation of wind farms rises, so will the need for decommissioning and analysis of the environmental impacts associated with decommissioning. This paper investigates how Environmental Impacts Assessments (EIA) identify, estimate and manage potential impacts of decommissioning. EIAs from 12 onshore and offshore windfarms consented between 2009 and 2014 in England and Scotland were analysed and compared. Attributes of these windfarms' Environmental Statements (ES) were scored under six categories: decommissioning in EIA stages, definitions of decommissioning, amount of analysis, depth of analysis, impacts identified, and proactive planning. Onshore windfarms generally tended to investigate the impacts of decommissioning less than offshore windfarms, even those which gained consent in the same year. The investigation of the impact of decommissioning improved for windfarms consented in the latter years of the study period. Across the ESs there was a lack of analysis of potential impacts from decommissioning in their own right: not simply as a reversal of the construction process. The impacts of different end of life scenarios were not analysed in any of the ESs studied. There is evidence to suggest the presence of windfarms, especially offshore, could in some cases be environmentally beneficial for certain species. However, the ecological impact of removing offshore structures at the end of life is unknown and is currently not investigated nor predicted in EIAs. Understanding the potential implications of full or partial removal of marine structures, or alternatives to decommissioning, could ensure that appropriate mitigation is considered at an early stage by both developer and consenting authority. That being said, it is also important to update the assessment of potential impacts over the life of the project as more information on the environment is gathered and end of life plans develop.     

Coping with uncertainty in environmental impact assessments: Open techniques

Uncertainty is virtually unavoidable in environmental impact assessments (EIAs). From the literature related to treating and managing uncertainty, we have identified specific techniques for coping with uncertainty in EIAs. Here, we have focused on basic steps in the decision-making process that take place within an EIA setting. More specifically, we have identified uncertainties involved in each decision-making step and discussed the extent to which these can be treated and managed in the context of an activity or project that may have environmental impacts. To further demonstrate the relevance of the techniques identified, we have examined the extent to which the EIA guidelines currently used in Colombia consider and provide guidance on managing the uncertainty involved in these assessments. Some points that should be considered in order to provide greater robustness in impact assessments in Colombia have been identified. These include the management of stakeholder values, the systematic generation of project options, and their associated impacts as well as the associated management actions, and the evaluation of uncertainties and assumptions. We believe that the relevant and specific techniques reported here can be a reference for future evaluations of other EIA guidelines in different countries.     

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.     

A qualitative method proposal to improve environmental impact assessment

In environmental impact assessment, qualitative methods are used because they are versatile and easy to apply. This methodology is based on the evaluation of the strength of the impact by grading a series of qualitative attributes that can be manipulated by the evaluator. The results thus obtained are not objective, and all too often impacts are eliminated that should be mitigated with corrective measures. However, qualitative methodology can be improved if the calculation of Impact Importance is based on the characteristics of environmental factors and project activities instead on indicators assessed by evaluators. In this sense, this paper proposes the inclusion of the vulnerability of environmental factors and the potential environmental impact of project activities. For this purpose, the study described in this paper defined Total Impact Importance and specified a quantification procedure. The results obtained in the case study of oil drilling in Colombia reflect greater objectivity in the evaluation of impacts as well as a positive correlation between impact values, the environmental characteristics at and near the project location, and the technical characteristics of project activities.     

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.