This article assesses the quality of the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) process in Turkey through an exploration of the legal status and practical dimensions of SIA. We examined a randomly selected sample of SIAs, implemented in 67 development and investment projects between 1993 and 2011, using non-mandatory indicators of quality assessment. We found that, although this period has seen substantial improvements in the legal status of SIA and some improvement in certain dimensions of SIA in practice, much remains to be done in respect to international principles, guidelines and best practices. In practice, SIA is often considered an informational and consultation activity to be fulfilled during the public participation meeting. Moreover, in most cases mechanisms of impact identification/prediction and mitigation/monitoring exist only in theory. On the basis of these findings and assessment of relevant legislation, we offer some recommendations to improve the SIA process in Turkey in hopes that an understanding of the problems plaguing SIA in practice renders these recommendations appropriate to other contexts as well.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process is a procedure that the environmental impacts of decisions on people, fauna and flora, soil, weather, climate, land, cultural heritage, etc. are taken into account before the decisions are made. Moreover, the EIA process has gradually been evolved to cover social aspects. However, Turkish legislation and implementation of EIA process seem to have significant problems when it comes to assessment of decisions on social aspects. This article will offer a critical account on the EIA process in Turkey with regard to the analysis of social impacts. The study will especially focus on whether the EIA reports in Turkey deal with the medium and long-term social impacts of the decisions in real terms and whether these reports have practical benefits in decision making processes. Moreover, the author will specifically ask whether EIA reports in Turkey assess the investments in terms of usefulness and sustainability. The main argument in this study is that those significant merits of the EIA process directly depend on the strength, efficiency and applicability of democratic participation mechanisms.