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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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

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

Using causal maps to support ex-post assessment of social impacts of dams

This paper presents the results of an ex-post assessment of two important dams in Brazil. The study follows the principles of Social Impact Management, which offer a suitable framework for analyzing the complex social transformations triggered by hydroelectric dams. In the implementation of this approach, participative causal maps were used to identify the ex-post social impacts of the Porto Primavera and Rosana dams on the community of Porto Rico, located along the High Paraná River. We found that in the operation of dams there are intermediate causes of a political nature, stemming from decisions based on values and interests not determined by neutral, exclusively technical reasons; and this insight opens up an area of action for managing the negative impacts of dams.     

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.     

Sustainability impact assessment to improve food security of smallholders in Tanzania

The objective of this paper was to assess the sustainability impacts of planned agricultural development interventions, so called upgrading strategies (UPS), to enhance food security and to identify what advantages and risks are assessed from the farmer's point of view in regards to social life, the economy and the environment. We developed a participatory methodological procedure that links food security and sustainable development. Farmers in four different case study villages in rural Tanzania chose their priority UPS. For these UPS, they assessed the impacts on locally relevant food security criteria. The positive impacts identified were mainly attributed to increased agricultural production and its related positive impacts such as increased income and improved access to necessary means to diversify the diet. However, several risks of certain UPS were also indicated by farmers, such as increased workload, high maintenance costs, higher competition among farmers, loss of traditional knowledge and social conflicts. We discussed the strong interdependence of socio-economic and environmental criteria to improve food security for small-scale farmers and analysed several trade-offs in regards to UPS choices and food security criteria. We also identified and discussed the advantages and challenges of our methodological approach. In conclusion, the participatory impact assessment on the farmer level allowed a locally specific analysis of the various positive and negative impacts of UPS on social life, the economy and the environment. We emphasize that only a development approach that considers social, economic and environmental challenges simultaneously can enhance food security.     

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.     

Coal mining and the resource community cycle: A longitudinal assessment of the social impacts of the Coppabella coal mine

Two social impact assessment (SIA) studies of Central Queensland's Coppabella coal mine were undertaken in 2002–2003 and 2006–2007. As ex post studies of actual change, these provide a reference point for predictive assessments of proposed resource extraction projects at other sites, while the longitudinal element added by the second study illustrates how impacts associated with one mine may vary over time due to changing economic and social conditions. It was found that the traditional coupling of local economic vitality and community development to the life cycle of resource projects—the resource community cycle—was mediated by labour recruitment and social infrastructure policies that reduced the emphasis on localised employment and investment strategies, and by the cumulative impacts of multiple mining projects within relative proximity to each other. The resource community cycle was accelerated and local communities forced to consider ways of attracting secondary investment and/or alternative industries early in the operational life of the Coppabella mine in order to secure significant economic benefits and to guard against the erosion of social capital and the ability to cope with future downturns in the mining sector.     

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.     

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.     

The social impacts of dams: A new framework for scholarly analysis

No commonly used framework exists in the scholarly study of the social impacts of dams. This hinders comparisons of analyses and thus the accumulation of knowledge. The aim of this paper is to unify scholarly understanding of dams' social impacts via the analysis and aggregation of the various frameworks currently used in the scholarly literature. For this purpose, we have systematically analyzed and aggregated 27 frameworks employed by academics analyzing dams' social impacts (found in a set of 217 articles). A key finding of the analysis is that currently used frameworks are often not specific to dams and thus omit key impacts associated with them. The result of our analysis and aggregation is a new framework for scholarly analysis (which we call ‘matrix framework’) specifically on dams' social impacts, with space, time and value as its key dimensions as well as infrastructure, community and livelihood as its key components. Building on the scholarly understanding of this topic enables us to conceptualize the inherently complex and multidimensional issues of dams' social impacts in a holistic manner. If commonly employed in academia (and possibly in practice), this framework would enable more transparent assessment and comparison of projects.     

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.     

Assessing impacts on reservations: A failure of social impact research

This paper addresses the failure of the social impact assessment process (SIA) used to analyze the effects of recent energy development near the Northern Cheyenne Reservation in Montana. Research conducted under the auspices of state and federal agencies to assess the impacts of coal development adjacent to the reservation has neglected to consider the potential negative consequences on the social interaction and organization of the Northern Cheyenne. The focus here is on one reservation, but the findings may be applicable to development near other reservations with similar demographic, social, and jurisdictional characteristics. Another important similarity includes the relationship between the reservations and persons and organizations outside them. An ideal model for analyzing reservations is described.     

The social values at risk from sea-level rise

Analysis of the risks of sea-level rise favours conventionally measured metrics such as the area of land that may be subsumed, the numbers of properties at risk, and the capital values of assets at risk. Despite this, it is clear that there exist many less material but no less important values at risk from sea-level rise. This paper re-theorises these multifarious social values at risk from sea-level rise, by explaining their diverse nature, and grounding them in the everyday practices of people living in coastal places. It is informed by a review and analysis of research on social values from within the fields of social impact assessment, human geography, psychology, decision analysis, and climate change adaptation. From this we propose that it is the ‘lived values’ of coastal places that are most at risk from sea-level rise. We then offer a framework that groups these lived values into five types: those that are physiological in nature, and those that relate to issues of security, belonging, esteem, and self-actualisation. This framework of lived values at risk from sea-level rise can guide empirical research investigating the social impacts of sea-level rise, as well as the impacts of actions to adapt to sea-level rise. It also offers a basis for identifying the distribution of related social outcomes across populations exposed to sea-level rise or sea-level rise policies.     

The social impacts of a stop-start transnational university campus: How the impact history and changing plans of projects affect local communities

Transnational higher education, in all its varied forms including offshore campuses, is a huge business, especially in relation to China. As at 2019, nine foreign universities had established campuses in China. Although generally this might be desirable, the social impacts of these campuses on local communities are overlooked. Transnational campuses take a long time to establish, and they experience delays and changes in participating parties, which creates anxiety and uncertainty for host communities. We consider the social impacts, as perceived or experienced by local residents, that arose from the attempted establishment of a transnational university campus in Yantai, Shandong Province, China. We consider how impact history and changing project plans affected residents. A major impact was prolonged uncertainty, especially now that the University of Groningen has cancelled its plans for a campus in Yantai. People felt confused about their future and some had lost trust in news about the project. Excessive expectations, impact history, changing plans, and impacts from urbanization processes generally have led to mixed feelings about the proposed campus. However, most people were willing to have a university campus nearby because they thought there would be benefits, even though they also considered they would experience negative impacts.