skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Social impact assessments: Developing a consolidated conceptual framework

Abstract

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.

Authors:
; ;
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22447505
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Environmental Impact Assessment Review; Journal Volume: 50; Other Information: Copyright (c) 2014 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS; EVALUATION; RECOMMENDATIONS; SOCIAL IMPACT

Citation Formats

Arce-Gomez, Antonio, E-mail: aarcegomez@swin.edu.au, Donovan, Jerome D., E-mail: jdonovan@swin.edu.au, and Bedggood, Rowan E., E-mail: rbedggood@swin.edu.au. Social impact assessments: Developing a consolidated conceptual framework. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1016/J.EIAR.2014.08.006.
Arce-Gomez, Antonio, E-mail: aarcegomez@swin.edu.au, Donovan, Jerome D., E-mail: jdonovan@swin.edu.au, & Bedggood, Rowan E., E-mail: rbedggood@swin.edu.au. Social impact assessments: Developing a consolidated conceptual framework. United States. doi:10.1016/J.EIAR.2014.08.006.
Arce-Gomez, Antonio, E-mail: aarcegomez@swin.edu.au, Donovan, Jerome D., E-mail: jdonovan@swin.edu.au, and Bedggood, Rowan E., E-mail: rbedggood@swin.edu.au. 2015. "Social impact assessments: Developing a consolidated conceptual framework". United States. doi:10.1016/J.EIAR.2014.08.006.
@article{osti_22447505,
title = {Social impact assessments: Developing a consolidated conceptual framework},
author = {Arce-Gomez, Antonio, E-mail: aarcegomez@swin.edu.au and Donovan, Jerome D., E-mail: jdonovan@swin.edu.au and Bedggood, Rowan E., E-mail: rbedggood@swin.edu.au},
abstractNote = {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.},
doi = {10.1016/J.EIAR.2014.08.006},
journal = {Environmental Impact Assessment Review},
number = ,
volume = 50,
place = {United States},
year = 2015,
month = 1
}
  • The wind power industry has grown rapidly in the UK to meet EU targets of sourcing 20% of energy from renewable sources by 2020. Although wind power is a renewable energy source, there are environmental concerns over increasing numbers of wind farm proposals and associated cumulative impacts. Individually, a wind farm, or indeed any action, may have minor effects on the environment, but collectively these may be significant, potentially greater than the sum of the individual parts acting alone. EU and UK legislation requires a cumulative impact assessment (CIA) as part of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA). However, in the absencemore » of detailed guidance and definitions, such assessments within EIA are rarely adequate, restricting the acquisition of basic knowledge about the cumulative impacts of wind farms on bird populations. Here we propose a conceptual framework to promote transparency in CIA through the explicit definition of impacts, actions and scales within an assessment. Our framework requires improved legislative guidance on the actions to include in assessments, and advice on the appropriate baselines against which to assess impacts. Cumulative impacts are currently considered on restricted scales (spatial and temporal) relating to individual development EIAs. We propose that benefits would be gained from elevating CIA to a strategic level, as a component of spatially explicit planning.« less
  • 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, environmentalmore » 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. - Highlights: • A theoretical foundation in actor–network theory • An ethical grounding in values which are internationally recognized, but rarely carried through into practice • A (new) epistemological-scientific base • A methodological foundation in social participation.« less
  • Currently, there is no standard method to assess the complex systems in rangeland ecosystems. Decision makers need baselines to create a common language of current rangeland conditions and standards for continued rangeland assessment. The Sustainable Rangeland Roundtable (SRR), a group of private and public organizations and agencies, has created a forum to discuss rangeland sustainability and assessment. The SRR has worked to integrate social, economic, and ecological disciplines related to rangelands and has identified a standard set of indicators that can be used to assess rangeland sustainability. As part of this process, SRR has developed a two-tiered conceptual framework frommore » a systems perspective to study the validity of indicators and the relationships among them. The first tier categorizes rangeland characteristics into four states. The second tier defines processes affecting these states through time and space. The framework clearly shows that the processes affect and are affected by each other.« less
  • One of the most perplexing problems in risk analysis is why some relatively minor risks or risk events, as assessed by technical experts, often elicit strong public concerns and result in substantial impacts upon society and economy. This article sets forth a conceptual framework that seeks to link systematically the technical assessment of risk with psychological, sociological, and cultural perspectives of risk perception and risk-related behavior. The main thesis is that hazards interact with psychological, social, institutional, and cultural processes in ways that may amplify or attenuate public responses to the risk or risk event. A structural description of themore » social amplification of risk is now possible. Amplification occurs at two stages: in the transfer of information about the risk, and in the response mechanisms of society. Signals about risk are processed by individual and social amplification stations, including the scientist who communicates the risk assessment, the news media, cultural groups, interpersonal networks, and others. Key steps of amplifications can be identified at each stage. The amplified risk leads to behavioral responses, which, in turn, result in secondary impacts. Models are presented that portray the elements and linkages in the proposed conceptual framework.« less
  • 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 socialmore » 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. -- Highlights: • A hybrid model to combine SIA and SRA namely RSIA is proposed. • RSIA can provide the proper mechanism to assess social impacts of natural hazards. • RSIA can play the role of ex-post as well as ex-ante assessment. • For some complicated and sensitive cases like nuclear energy, conducting a RSIA is necessary.« less