Advancing the theory and practice of impact assessment: Setting the research agenda

Pope, Jenny; Bond, Alan; Morrison‐Saunders, Angus; Retief, François

doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2013.01.008

Cited by 217 publications

(167 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…better information leads to better decisions based on 'normal science' whereby uncertainty is not present) was not questioned. More recently, however, there has been significant debate about the appropriate theoretical basis for IA, particularly in the light of uncertainty and different values of stakeholders (see, for example, Lawrence, 1997;Wallington et al, 2007;Weston, 2010;Pope et al, 2013). The argument is therefore that rational decision-making is neither typical of proposals subject to IA, nor appropriate (Kørnøv and Thissen, 2000).…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Managing uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance in impact assessment by embedding evolutionary resilience, participatory modelling and adaptive management

Bond

Morrison‐Saunders

Gunn

et al. 2015

Journal of Environmental Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the context of continuing uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance in impact assessment (IA) prediction, the case is made that existing IA processes are based on false 'normal' assumptions that science can solve problems and transfer knowledge into policy. Instead, a 'post-normal science' approach is needed that acknowledges the limits of current levels of scientific understanding. We argue that this can be achieved through embedding evolutionary resilience into IA; using participatory workshops; and emphasizing adaptive management. The goal is an IA process capable of informing policy choices in the face of uncertain influences acting on socio-ecological systems. We propose a specific set of process steps to operationalise this post-normal science approach which draws on work undertaken by the Resilience Alliance. This process differs significantly from current models of IA, as it has a far greater focus on avoidance of, or adaptation to (through incorporating adaptive management subsequent to decisions), unwanted future scenarios rather than a focus on the identification of the implications of a single preferred vision. Implementing such a process * corresponding author 2 would represent a culture change in IA practice as a lack of knowledge is assumed and explicit, and forms the basis of future planning activity, rather than being ignored.

show abstract

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Managing uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance in impact assessment by embedding evolutionary resilience, participatory modelling and adaptive management

Bond

Morrison‐Saunders

Gunn

et al. 2015

Journal of Environmental Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, Pope et al (2013) assert that the objectives of SIA may be more closely aligned with the public affairs functions of a private corporation, than as a framework for identification and management of social impacts and benefits.…”

Section: It Defines Fpic Asmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The need to identify and assess impacts of development intervention on indigenous communities was brought to light in the 1970s, through the Berger Inquiry 29 . The Inquiry is considered to have paved the way for legitimising indigenous knowledge and addressing social justice concerns (Christensen and Grant, 2007), and for recognising that infrastructure development is not simply about the project, but about the future of communities and its peoples (Berger, 1977 (Pope et al, 2013 environmental, and economic impact of a proposed gas pipeline, by drawing on personal accounts with project-affected peoples (Gamble, 1978 Notable scholars who contributed to the early SIA literature, including that which attempted to situate SIA in theory, included Friesema andCulhane (1976), Derman andWhiteford (1985), Howitt (1989), Henry (1990), Craig (1990) and Rickson et al (1990). For example, Rickson et al (1990) explore the sociological theory underpinning SIA and stress that recognition of power relations and context are the key determinants for the success of SIA.…”

Section: The Institutionalisation Of Siamentioning

confidence: 99%

Social impact assessment, social justice and scales of knowledge: exploring the emerging mining industry in Solomon Islands

Ash¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This thesis examines power relations in the context of social impact assessment (SIA) as it is applied in the emerging mining industry in Solomon Islands. While the social impacts of large-scale mining in the Global South are well documented, little is known about how and why adverse social impacts continue to occur in the presence of numerous 'best practice' policy and planning tools, including SIA. This raises questions on the efficacy of SIA in identifying, contextualising and mitigating potential social impacts on communities affected by mining activity, particularly on traditional lands inhabited by indigenous peoples.This thesis presents a critical analysis of SIA to provide insight on this disparity in policy and practice, and to enhance sociological understanding on the interplay of globally-driven mining projects, the identification of social impacts, and the role of policy and institutions in cross-cultural contexts. The proposed extraction of nickel in Isabel Province, Solomon Islands, serves as the case study for this analysis. Employing the conceptual frameworks of social justice and political ecology, and drawing on six months' fieldwork in Solomon Islands, qualitative data from individual and group interviews (n=33) and document analysis (n=11) was collected across geopolitical scales -international, national, provincial and local -to compare and analyse perspectives of documents, institutions and people towards SIA and socially just development in the context of potential mining activity. Analysis of these perspectives exposed the extent to which SIA produces, reinforces and/or exacerbates, social injustices.Research findings identified the limits of SIA in: 1) recognising and accounting for indigenous identities and gender roles; 2) the unequal distribution of economic and other resources associated with the development of mining, including the privatisation of land and employment; and 3) representation of project-affected communities through consultation activities associated with SIA, including Free, Prior and Informed Consent. With political ecology as the foundation of this thesis, this thesis argues that these social injustices materialise as a result of a disparity, or mismatch, between knowledge frames across scales.While SIA is bounded to the rhetoric of social justice, consent and participation, this thesis demonstrates that Western expert knowledge and norms are interwoven into the SIA regime, rendering local experiential knowledge marginal. Reflecting this, a multiscale SIA approach is proposed to include consideration of different scales of knowledge systems, iii with outcomes that might assist to mitigate social injustices, such as those identified in this

show abstract

“…This affects the evaluation of previous experiences on SEA, and the definition of how to improve SEA efficacy bridging the divide between theory and practice (Noble et al 2012;Pope et al 2013;Dalal-Clayton & Sadler 2014). In asking 'what's next', Dalal-Clayton and Sadler identify "framework and dimension of sustainability", as well as "their use and application" as the two themes on which to focus to improve SEA (2014, p. 678).…”

Section: The Research Background/rationalementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Third, evaluation is one of the key features of SEA, and relates to EIA capacity to assess project impacts and to the debate on effective Impact Assessments (Pope et al 2013). Sadler suggests testing EIA and SEA efficacy by focusing on the relationship between sustainability and the planning process and considering "whether and how these processes make a difference to decision making" (2004, p. 263).…”

Section: Sea Capacity Building and Policy-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A limits-oriented approach to sustainable planning assessments: a comparative analysis of South East Queensland (Australia) and Lombardia (Italy)

Baresi¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable development is one of the key issues facing human survival on this planet. The urban planning discipline is actively involved in fostering more feasible ways to structure human activities and their relationship with the global ecosystem's finite resources. Since sustainability has become a major issue for human kind, sustainability assessments have proliferated in different ways to integrate socio-economic prosperity and provide environmental safeguards. In theory, these assessments can contribute towards addressing the increasing threats posed by climate change and by the depletion of natural resources, by building consensus around shared strategies involving a wide range of stakeholders to address national and international sustainable development goals. In practice however, sustainability assessments are undermined by problems associated with first the policy-making processes (for example, stakeholders' involvement) and second the measurement of the impacts of policies, plans and programs (such as the definition and computation of sustainability indicators). These issues weaken community trust in sustainability assessments and reduce their efficacy. Critical research is required to explore viable solutions.The main goal of this thesis is to address the shortcomings of current procedures for sustainability assessment. A comparative case study explores differences and similarities between an Australian region (South East Queensland) and an Italian region (Lombardia), which are representative of different institutional and planning backgrounds. Methodologically, this thesis develops and applies a framework to understand how limitations within political and societal processes prevent the achievement of environmentally sustainable planning. This framework combines a 'limits-oriented approach to evolutionary ecology' (Sih & Gleeson 1995) transposed to governance and policy-making processes, and the need to pursue a sustainable use of finite natural resources as suggested by positions addressing the 'limits to growth' by Meadows et al. (1972).Overall, this thesis develops an approach to diagnose current obstacles that need to be overcome and the pathway for achieving institutionalised limits-oriented approaches for improving procedures of sustainability assessment. This 'limits-oriented' framework outlines the benefits that South East Queensland and Lombardia can achieve by optimising current practices for sustainable planning within their regional contexts. This approach explores the limiting traits that undermine the performance of sustainability assessments, and proposes ways to bridge the gaps that separate their theoretical conceptualisation from their practical implementation.The framework developed and tested through this thesis offers an analytical lens to examine how the assessment of sustainable planning is currently featured in different institutional contexts. Its experimental implementation in countries with different planning traditions provides an insight on iii how to overcome iss...

show abstract

Advancing the theory and practice of impact assessment: Setting the research agenda

Cited by 217 publications

References 74 publications

Managing uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance in impact assessment by embedding evolutionary resilience, participatory modelling and adaptive management

Managing uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance in impact assessment by embedding evolutionary resilience, participatory modelling and adaptive management

Social impact assessment, social justice and scales of knowledge: exploring the emerging mining industry in Solomon Islands

A limits-oriented approach to sustainable planning assessments: a comparative analysis of South East Queensland (Australia) and Lombardia (Italy)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About