Guidelines and Principles For Social Impact Assessment

Prepared by The Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment May 199

U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Contents 1. Section I - Introduciton 2. Section II - Legal Mandates and Administrative Procedures for Social Impact Assessment 3. Section III - A Basic Model for Social Impact Assessment 4. Section I - Steps in t!e Social Impact Assessment Process ". Section - Principles for Social Impact Assessment #. Section I - $onclusion %. Section II - Accessi&le Social Impact Assessment Literature

Introduction
Since passage of t!e 'ational (nvironmental Polic) Act *'(PA+ of 1,#,environmental impact assess-ment !as &ecome t!e .e) component of environmental planning and decision ma.ing in t!e /nited States. More recentl)agenc) planners and decision ma.ers !ave recogni0ed a need for &etter understanding t!e social conse1uences of pro2ects- pro-grams and policies. In response to t!is need a group of social scientists formed t!e Interorgani0ational $ommittee on 3uidelines Principles for Social Impact Assessment *SIA+- 4it! t!e purpose of out-lining a set of guidelines and principles t!at 4ill assist agencies and private interest in fulfilling t!eir o&ligations under '(PA- related aut!orities and agenc) mandates. B) 5social impacts5 4e mean t!e conse1uences to !uman populations of an) pu&lic or private ac-tions-t!at alter t!e 4a)s in 4!ic! people live- 4or.- pla)relate to one anot!er- organi0e to meet t!eir needs and generall) cope as

mem&ers of societ). 6!e term also includes cultural impacts involving c!anges to t!e norms- values- and &eliefs t!at guide and rationali0e t!eir cognition of t!emselves and t!eir societ). In t!is monograp!- !o4ever- 4e define social impact assessment in terms of efforts to assess or estimate- in advance- t!e social conse1uences t!at are li.el) to follo4 from specific polic) actions *in-cluding programs- and t!e adoption of ne4 polices+- and specific government actions *including &uildings- large pro2ects and leasing large tracts of land for resource e7traction+- particularl) in t!e conte7t of t!e /.S. 'ational (nvironmental Polic) Act of 1,#, or 5'(PA5 *P.L. ,1-1,8- 42 /.S.$. 43%1 et se1.+. A central re1uirement of '(PA is t!at &efore an) agenc) of t!e federal government ma) ta.e 5actions significantl) affecting t!e 1ualit) of t!e !uman environment5 t!at agenc) must first prepare an (nvironmental Impact Statement *or (IS+. Preparing an (IS re1uires t!e integrated use of t!e social sciences. 6!e social science components of (IS9s are called social or socioeconomic impact assessments- or simpl)SIA9s. Several federal agencies !ave moved to develop SIA guidelines- &ut most !ave not. (ven 4it!in agencies t!at !ave SIA guidelines t!ere is variation on !o4 t!e social component of '(PA is to &e implemented. Since t!e passage of '(PA t!ere !as never &een a s)stematicinter-disciplinar) state-ment from t!e social science communit) as to 4!at s!ould &e in t!e content of an SIA- even t!oug! t!e term 5social impact assessment5 4as first used 4!en t!e :epartment of t!e Interior 4as preparing t!e (IS for t!e 6rans-Alas.a pipeline in t!e earl) 1,%89s. 6!e purpose of t!is monograp! is to present t!e central principles and some operational guidelines for use &) federal agencies in conducting social impact assessments. 6!e organi0ations and individuals listed on t!e cover s!eet represent &ot! relevant social science disciplines and persons 4!o !ave done SIA9s &ot! in federal agencies and t!e private sector- and t!ose 4!o !ave taug!t courses and conducted social impact assessment researc! t!roug! universities. 6!is document is t!e first s)stematic and interdisciplinar) statement to offer guidelines and principles to assist government agencies and private sector interests in using SIA to ma.e &etter decisions under '(PA and related aut!orities *see Section II+. 6!ese guidelines and standards are e1uall) important for t!ose communities and individuals li.el) to &e affected &) proposed actions in order t!at t!e) mig!t conduct independent assessments or evaluate t!e ade1uac) of SIA9s. ;it!in t!ese fe4 pages 4e cannot cover over t4o decades of researc! on 5social effects5 muc! less ever) contingenc) t!at ma) occur in t!e course of implementing a proposed pro2ect or polic) c!ange. <o4ever- 4e do provide a &road overvie4- focusing less on met!odological

details and more on t!e guidelines and principles for t!e preparation of tec!nicall) and su&stantivel) ade1uate SIA9s 4it!in reasona&le time and resource constraints.
Listed alphabetically, the paper was prepared by Burdge, Fricke, Finsterbush, Freudenburg, Gramling, Holden, Llewwellyn, Petterson, Thompson and Williams. omments were recei!ed "rom Hobson Bryan, Tom Greider, Lambert Wenner, and #ichard $to""le. % pre!ious dra"t o" the paper was gi!en with the title, &$ocial 'mpact %ssessment( Principles and $tandards "or ).$. Federal %gencies and ).$. $ponsored *onor %gencies,& as a parallel plenary session at the +,th %nnual -eeting o" the 'nternational %ssociation "or 'mpact %ssessment, .ian He Hotel, $hanghai, hina, /une +01+2, +33, and included in the %bstracts 4p. +21+56.

e!al Mandates and Administrative Procedures for Social Impact Assessment

Section II of t!e monograp! provides a &rief over-vie4 of t!e legal mandates and t!e administrative procedures t!at s!ape SIA9s done in t!e conte7t of environmental impact statements= Section III pro-vides a &asic model for social impact assessment= Section I outlines t!e steps in doing an SIA= and Section provides principles and guidelines for doing social impact assessment. ;e concluded 4it! a list of east-to-o&tain references. Prior to t!e enactment of t!e 'ational (nviron-mental Polic) Act- anal)sis of t!e social conse-1uences of ma2or pro2ects often 4as fragmented and lac.ing in focus. >or e7ample- 4!en construction-related impacts of pu&lic 4or.s pro2ects 4ere at issue- attention 4as generall) centered on economic considerations. 6!e prevailing vie4 4as t!at mone) could compensate for an) adverse impacts. 6!ere 4as minimal concern for social impacts even if entire neig!&or!oods !ad to &e displaced so long as compara&le !ousing could &e located else4!ere. 6!ere 4as even less concern for t!e distri&ution or 5e1uit)5 of t!ese impacts on different populations. Also lost in t!is process 4as t!e important people attac! to t!eir communities and neig!&or!oods= and particularl) to long-standing social net4or.s t!at form t!e &asis of support &ot! for dail) living and during periods of e7treme stress and !ards!ip. 6!e passing of '(PA created a different- &ut som4!at vague- set of re1uirements for federal agencies= among t!ese is t!e integrated use of t!e social sciences in assessing impacts on t!e !uman environment. ?ver t!e )earst!e legal definition of 5!uman environment5 !as undergone su&stantial modification as a result of court decisions stemming from '(PA-related litigation. 6!e council on (nvi-ronmental @ualit)9s *$(@9s+ Aegulations for Imple-menting t!e Procedural Provisions of t!e 'ational (nvironmental Polic) Act *48 $>A 1"88-1"8B+ point-out t!at t!e 5!uman environment5 is to &e 5interpreted compre!ensivel)5 to include 5t!e natural and p!)sical environment and t!e relations!ip of people 4it! t!at environment5 *48 $>A 1"8B.14+. Agencies need to assess not onl) so-called- 5direct5 effects- &ut also 5aest!etic-

!istoric- cultural- eco-nomic- social- or !ealt!5 effects- 54!et!er direct- indirector cumulative5 *48 $>A 1"8B.B+. 6!e $(@ Aegulations also contain anot!er .e) provision t!at s!ould &e noted 5..economic or social effects are not intended &) t!emselves to re1uire preparation of an environmental impact statement5 *48 $>A 1"8B.14+. <o4ever- 4!en an (IS is prepared 5and economic or social and natural or p!)sical environmental effects are interrelated- t!en t!e environmental impact statement 4ill discuss all of t!ese effects on t!e !uman environment5 *48 $>A 1"8B.14+. 6!e (IS9s are t!us intended to provide a .ind of full-disclosure procedure for federal decision-ma.ers- 4!o are t!en e7pected to consider t!e negative as 4ell as t!e positive implications of potential courses of action- and t!e unintended as 4ell as t!e intended conse1uences- &efore t!e) proceed. '(PA also provides citi0ens 4it! t!e opportunit) to c!allenge agenc) decisions= again in t!is case- !o4ever- '(PA9s provisions are often misunderstood. 6!e greatest level of legal vulnera&ilit) for t!e agenc) is not created &) ta.ing actions t!at 4ill create negative impacts. It comes from failing to consider or full) anal)0e t!ose impacts in advance. Most federal agencies are re1uired to esta&lis! government-to-government relations!ips 4it! American Indian tri&es. 6!e re1uirement is passed on to states- cities- and counties 4!en federal funds are involved. 6!e special status of American Indian tri&es is recogni0ed in t!e $(@ Aegulations 4it! earl) .no4ledge of pro2ects- participation in t!e formulation of issues and data collection- and com-ments on drafts 4!enever a pro2ect can impact Indian people living on a reservation. American Indian concerns are to &e included in an (IS 4!enever a pro2ect affects an) of t!eir culture9s resources on or off current reservation lands. American Indian rig!ts in t!e SIA process !ave &een e7panded &) t!e American Indian Aeligious >reedom Act *PL ,"-341+ and t!e 'ative American 3raves Protection and Aepatriation Act of 1,,8. Alt!oug! neit!er act 4as specificall) designed to affect t!e '(PA and SIA processes- &ot! acts !ave resulted in special sections in (IS9s involving traditional Indian lands. Fi!ure " presents a &rief c!ronolog) listing stat-utes and regulations t!at directl) or indirectl) man-date t!e conduct of social impact assessment. <o4ever- t!e '(PA re1uirements 4ere first. 6!e) continue to !ave t!e &roadest applica&ilit) in t!e /.S.- and t!us 4ere focused on social impact assess-ment 4it!in t!at conte7t.
Fi!ure ". Statutes and #e!ulations that Mandate or Contain Provisions for the Conduct of Social Impact Assessment date la$ provisions

1,%8 'ational (nvironmental Polic) Act of $alls for t!e integrated use of t!e social sciences in assessing 1,#,. impacts 5on t!e !uman environ-ment5. Also re1uires t!e identification of met!ods and proceduresC4!ic! insure t!at presentl) un1uantified environmental amenities and values &e given appropriate consideration. 1,%# Magnuson >is!er) $onservation and ;!ere a 5s)stem for limiting access to t!e fis!er) in order to Management Act- as amended *1# ac!ieve optimum )ield5 is deemed necessar)- t!e Act re1uires /.S.$.A. 1B81- es seg.+. t!e Secretar) of $om-merce and t!e regional >is!er) Management $ouncils to consider in dept! t!e economic and social impacts of t!e s)stem. 1,%B /.S. $ouncil on (nvironmental 59<uman environment9 s!all &e interpreted com-pre!ensivel) @ualit) 1,%B. *48 $>A 1"88-1"8B+. to include t!e natural and p!)sical environment and t!e Aegulations for implementing t!e relations!ip of people 4it! t!at environment.5 proce-dural provision of t!e 'ational (nvironmental Polic) Act. 1,%B ?uter $ontinental S!elf Lands Act- as 56!e term 9!uman environment9 means t!e p!)si-cal- socialamended *43 /.S.$.A. 1331 es seg.+. and economic components- conditions and factors 4!ic! interactivel) determine t!e state- condition- and 1ualit) of living conditions- emplo)ment- and !ealt! of t!ose affected directl) or indirectl)5 &) t!e resource development activi-ties in 1uestion. 1,B8 $ompre!ensive (nvironmental $alls for 4or.ing 4it! affected pu&lics t!roug! communit) Aesponse- $ompensa-tion and relations programs and assessing communit) and state Lia&ilit) Act *2# and 43 /.S.$.A. es acceptance of Superfund plans and affecting local seg.+. populations. 1,B2 'uclear ;aste Polic) Act. $alls for t!e preparation of an (IS- specific de- mograp!ic limitations on siting t!e nuclear re-positor)= inclusion of affected Indian 6ri&es in t!e siting process and impact assistance. 1,B# Superfund Amendments and ;or. 4it! an affected pu&lic t!roug! communit) relations Aeaut!ori0ation Act. programs and assessing t!e acceptance of plans &) local communiities. 1,B# $ouncil of (nvironmental @ualit) *48 6!e treatment of incomplete or unaviala&le infor-mation is $>A 1"88-1"8B+ re-issue of clarified. regulations implementing t!e procedural provisions of t!e 'ational (nvironmental Polic) Act.

A %asic Model for Social Impact Assessment

6!e Lin. &et4een (nvironmental Impact Assessment and Social Impact Assessment Impacts on t!e social environment resem&le &io-p!)sical impacts in several 4a)s. Social and &iop!)sical impacts can var) in desir- a&ilit)- ranging from t!e desira&le to t!e adverse. 6!e) also var) in scale-t!e 1uestion of 4!et!er a facilit) 4ill create "8 or 1888 2o&s- for e7ample- or 4ill !ave t!e potential to spill "8 or 1888 gallons of to7ic 4aste. Anot!er consideration involves t!e e7tent of du-ration of impacts in time and space. Li.e &io-p!)sical impacts- some social impacts can &e of s!ort duration- 4!ile ot!ers can last a lifetime= and some communities 5return to normal5 1uite 1uic.l) once a source of disruption is removed4!ile ot!er do not. Social impacts can also var) in intensit) or severit)- a dimension t!at is defined differentl) in different pro2ect settings- 2ust as an o&2ective &iop!)sical impact *e.g.- a predicted loss of %" sea otters+ mig!t !ave a minor effect on populations in one location *e.g.- off t!e coast of Alas.a+- 4!ile amounting to significant fraction of t!e remaining population in anot!er location *e.g.- off t!e cost of $alifornia+. Similarl)- t!ere are differences in t!e degree to 4!ic! &ot! t)pe of impacts are li.el) to &e cu-mulative- at one e7treme- or mutuall) counter-&alancing- at t!e ot!er. It is important to consider t!e social e1uit) or distri&ution of impacts across different populations. Dust as t!e &iological sections of (IS9s devote par-ticular attention to t!reatened or endangered plant and 4ildlife species- t!e socioeconomic sections of (IS9s must devote particular attention to t!e impacts on vulnera&le segments of t!e !uman population. (7amples include t!e poort!e elderl)- adolescents- t!e unemplo)ed- and 4omen= mem&ers of t!e minorit) andEor ot!er groups t!at are raciall)- et!nicall)- or culturall) distinctive= or occupational- cultural- political- or value-&ased groups for 4!om a given communit)- region- or use of t!e &iop!)sical environment is particularl) important. In addition to t!e t)pes of distur&ances t!at can affect ot!er species- !umans are affected &) c!anges in t!e distinctl) !uman environment- including t!ose associated 4it! t!e p!enomenon .no4n as t!e social construction of realit). Persons not familiar 4it! t!e social sciences are often tempted to treat social constructions as mere perceptions or emotions- to &e distinguis!ed from realit). Suc! a separation is not so eas) to accomplis!. ;e are careful to point out t!at t!e social construction of realit) is c!aracteristic of all social groups- including t!e agencies t!at are attempting to implement c!anges as 4ell as t!e

communities t!at are affected. In t!e case of proposed actions t!at involve con-trovers)- attitudes and perceptions to4ard a proposed polic) c!ange are one of t!e varia&les t!at must &e considered in determining t!e significance of impacts *48 $>A 1"8B.2%&F4G+. :uring controversies- parti-cipants are often tempted to dismiss t!e concerns of ot!ers as &eing merel) imagined or perceived. 6!ere are t4o important factual reasons not to omit suc! concerns from SIA9s and (IS9s- regardless of 4!et!er t!e vie4s are 4idel) accepted internall) or come from an agenc)9s critics. >irst- positions ta.en &) all sides in a given controvers) are li.el) to &e s!aped &) *differing+ perceptions of t!e polic) or pro2ect- and t!e decision to accept one set of per-ceptions 4!ile e7cluding anot!er- ma) not &e scien-tificall) defensi&le. Second- if t!e agenc) asserts t!at its critics are 5emotional5 or 5misinformed-5 for e7ample- it is guaranteed to raise t!e level of !ostilit) &et4een itself and communit) mem&ers and 4ill stand in t!e 4a) of a successful resolution of t!e pro&lem. In summar)- some of t!e most important aspects of social impacts- involve not t!e p!)sical relocation of !uman populations- &ut t!e meanings- perceptions- or social significance of t!ese c!anges. A Social Impact Assessment Frame$or& 6o predict 4!at t!e pro&a&le impact of development 4ill &e- 4e see. to understand t!e past &e!avior of individuals and communities affected &) agenc) actions- development- or polic) c!anges. ;e use a comparative SIA met!od to stud) t!e course of events in a communit) 4!ere an environ-mental c!ange !as occurred- and e7trapolate from t!at anal)sis 4!at is li.el) to !appen in anot!er communit) 4!ere a similar development or polic) c!ange is planned. Put anot!er 4a)- if 4e 4is! to .no4 t!e pro&a&le effects of a proposed pro2ect in location B- one of t!e &est places to start is to assess t!e effects of a similar pro2ect t!at !as alread) &een completed in location A. Specific varia&les to access pro2ect impacts are s!o4n later in t!is section. Based on t!e direction outlined in '(PA and t!e $(@ Aegulations- 4e need to identif) pro&a&le un-desira&le social effects of development &efore t!e) occur in order to ma.e recommendations for miti-gation. As 4e point out in a later section- t!e appro-priate federal agenc) *in cooperation 4it! t!e local communit)+ &ears responsi&ilit) for coordinating mitigation efforts. 6!e SIA model also allo4s us to address t!e issues of alternative plans and alternative impacts of a proposed pro2ect. Moreover- &ecause social impacts can &e measured and understood- recommendations for mitigating actions on t!e part

of t!e agencies can &e made. In Section I 4e outline a procedure for mitigating potentiall) adverse impacts. It is almost impossi&le to catalogue all dimen-sions of social impacts &ecause c!ange !as a 4a) of creating ot!er c!anges. A free4a) e7tension facili-tates residential gro4t! 4!ic! leads to increased traffic and air pollution- creation of ne4 sc!ools- retail centers- and ot!er services- and t!e decline of a do4nto4n neig!&or!ood. In >igure 3 4e !ave identified t!e &asic social dimensions t!at can &e measured 4!ic! reflect fun-damental and important c!aracteristics of a com-munit). Studied over time- t!ese c!aracteristics give us insig!t as to !o4 social structure 4ill &e altered 4!en c!ange occurs. >aced 4it! a proposal to implement a ne4 s.i area- for e7ample- t!e communit) and t!e agenc) proposing t!e c!ange can profit from t!e e7perience of ot!er compara&le communities t!at !ave alread) undergone a s.i area development and t!ere&) gain a reasona&l) accurate e7pectation of !o4 t!e pro2ect 4ill affect t!eir communit). >orecasted impacts are t!e difference in t!e !u-man environment &et4een t!e future 4it! t!e pro2ect and a future 4it!out t!e pro2ect. Since 4e cannot see t!e future- 4e loo. at similar communities t!at !ave e7perienced similar policies or pro2ects in t!e past. 6!e social impact assessment model is comparative. ?ur e7perience !as s!o4n t!e forecasts can &e made a&out pro&a&le social impacts. 6!e model also permits a restud) of t!e impacted communit) in t!e future to assess 4!at t!e actual impact !as &een- so t!at t!e fit &et4een forecasts and outcome can &e matc!ed. ?ne 4a) to capture t!e d)namic comple7 1ualit) of social impacts is to metap!oricall) ta.e a series of snaps!ots over time as t!e development event or polic) c!ange unfolds and fill in 4!at !appened in &et4een. Ideall)information a&out t!e communit) or geograp!ic area of stud) is availa&le &ot! &efore and after t!e event to !elp in measurement. Social impacts t!en &ecome t!e c!anges ta.ing place &et4een t!e t4o measurements points. 6!e social assessor attempts to forecast t!e c!ange associated 4it! proposed activit)- &ased on researc! and information accumulated from comparative studies of similar situations. A strengt! of t!e comparative SIA model is t!at 4it! appropriate data sources *t!ose 4!ic! can &e collected fre1uentl)- suc! as land transfer records+ it allo4s for an interpretation of d)namic events and can provide monitoring of s!ort-term impacts. 6!is .ind of fre1uent monitoring provides a continual source of evaluation or c!ec. on t!e direction of forecasts made a&out social impacts. Sta!e in Pro'ect(Polic) Development

All pro2ects and policies go t!roug! a series of steps or stages- starting 4it! initial planning- t!en imple-mentation and construction- carr)ing t!roug! to operation and maintenance *see >igure 2+. At some point t!e pro2ect mig!t &e a&andoned or decom-misioned- or official polic) could c!ange. Social impacts 4ill &e different for eac! stage. Scoping of issues prior to anal)sis ma) lead t!e assessor to focus onl) on one stage. >or e7ample- one communit) mig!t &e concerned a&out pu&lic reaction resulting from initial siting of a !a0ardous 4aste disposal facilit)= anot!er 4it! t!e construction aspects of reservoirs= and a t!ird mig!t &e faced 4it! a c!ange in t!e designation of ad2acent pu&lic land from tim&er production to 4ilderness use. 6!e specific stage in life of t!e pro2ect or polic) is an important factor in determining effects. 'ot all social impacts 4ill occur at eac! stage. >igure 2 illustrates t!e stages in pro2ect development. ". Plannin!(Polic) Development PlanningEpolic) development refers to all activit) t!at ta.es place from t!e time a pro2ect or polic) is conceived to t!e point of construction activit) or polic) implementation. (7amples include pro2ect design- revision- pu&lic commentlicensing- t!e evaluating of alternatives- and t!e decision to go a!ead. Social impacts actuall) &egin t!e da) t!e action is proposed and can &e measured from t!at point. Social assessors must recogni0e t!e importance of local or national social constructions of realit)- 4!ic! &egin during t!e earliest of t!e four stages-t!e planningEpolic) development stage. ;e often assume t!at no impacts 4ill ta.e place until Stage 2 *constructionEimplementation+ &egins on a pro2ect -t!roug! dirt-moving operations- for e7ample- or t!e start-up of construction activities. <o4ever- real- measura&le- and often significant effects on t!e !uman environment can &egin to ta.e place as soon as t!ere are c!anges in social or economic conditions. >rom t!e time of t!e earliest announce-ment of a pending polic) c!ange or rumor a&out a pro2ect- &ot! !opes and !ostilities can &egin to mount= speculators can loc. up potentiall) important properties- politicians can maneuver for position- and interest groups can form or redirect t!eir energies. 6!ese c!anges occur &) merel) introducing ne4 information into a communit) or region. *. Construction(Implementation 6!e constructionEimplementation stage &egins 4!en a decision is made to proceed- a permit is issued or a la4 or regulation ta.es place. >or t)pical construction pro2ects- t!is involves clearing land- &uilding access roadsdeveloping utilities- etc. :isplacement and relocation of people- if necessar)occurs during t!is p!ase. :epending on t!e scale of t!e pro2ect- t!e &uildup of a migrant construction 4or. force also ma) occur. If signi-ficant in-migration occurs- t!e ne4 residents ma) create a strain on communit) infrastructure- as

4ell as creating social stresses due to c!anging patterns of social interaction. $ommunities ma) !ave difficulties in responding to t!e increased demands on sc!ool- !ealt! facilities- !ousing and ot!er social services. >urt!er stresses ma) &e created &) resentments &et4een ne4comers and long-time residents- &) sudden increases in t!e prices for !ousing and local services- and even &) increased uncertaint) a&out t!e future. ;!en ne4 policies are implementedlocal economies and organi0a-tions ma) c!ange- and old &e!avior are replaced 4it! ne4 4a)s of relating to t!e environment and its resources. +. Operation(Maintenance 6!e operationEmaintenance stage occurs after t!e construction is complete or t!e polic) is full) oper-ational. In man) cases- t!is stage 4ill re1uire fe4er 4or.ers t!an t!e constructionEimplementation p!ase. If operations continue at a relativel) sta&le level for an e7tended period of time- effects during t!is stage can often &e t!e most &eneficial of t!ose at an) stage. $ommunities see.ing industrial devel-opment 4ill often focus on t!is stage &ecause of t!e long-term economic &enefits t!at ma) follo4 from a development. It is also during t!is stage t!at t!e communities can adapt to ne4 social and economic conditionsaccommodation can t ta.e place- and t!e e7pectations of positive effects-suc! as sta&le population- a 1ualit) infrastructure- and emplo)ment opportunities-can &e reali0ed. ,. A-andonment(Decommissionin! A&andonmentEdecommissioning &egins 4!en t!e proposal is made t!at t!e pro2ect or polic) and associated activit) 4ill cease at some time in t!e future. As in t!e planning stage- t!e social impacts of decommissioning &egin 4!en t!e intent to close do4n is announced and t!e communit) or region must again adapt- &ut t!is time to t!e loss of t!e pro2ect or an ad2ustment to a polic) c!ange. Some-times t!is means t!e loss of t!e economic &ase as a &usiness closes its doors. At ot!er times- t!e dis-ruptions to t!e local communit) ma) &e lessened or at least altered if one t)pe of 4or.er is replaced &) anot!er- as in a case suc! as t!e <anford >acilit) in ;as!ington State- 4!ere nuclear production facili-ties !ave &een closed do4n- &ut emplo)ment !as actuall) increased as environmental cleanup spe-cialists !ave &een !ired to !elp deal 4it! t!e con-tamination at t!e facilit). In ot!er cases- disruption ma) &e e7acer&ated if t!e communit) is not onl) losing its present economic &ase- &ut !as lost t!e capacit) to return to a former economic &ase. Mor-gan $it)Louisiana 4!ic! !ad &een t!e self-pro-claimed 5s!rimp capital of t!e 4orld5 in t!e 1,"89s is a good e7ample of a communit) t!at lost its ca-pacit) to return to a former economic &ase. :uring t!e 1,#89s and 1,%89s t!e emplo)ment in t!is communit) s!ifted to offs!ore oil development. ;!en oil prices collapsed in t!e 1,B89s- t!e communit) found it could not return to t!e s!rimp industr)

&ecause s!rimp-processing facilities !ad closed do4n and most of t!e s!rimp &oats !ad &een allo4ed to deca) or left t!e area. .he Pro'ect .)pe and Settin! Pro2ects and polic) decisions 4!ic! re1uire and &enefit from social impact assessment range from prison and plant sitings- to !ig!4a)- reservoir- and po4er plant construction- to managing old gro4t! forests to maintain a &iologicall) diverse region. Accordingl) pro2ects t)pes ma) range from isolated 4ilderness areas to ur&an neig!&or!oods- eac! 4it! special c!aracteristics t!at can affect social impacts. Social impacts *as 4ell as economic and p!)sical c!anges+ 4ill var) depending upon t!e t)pe of de-velopment. 6!e follo4ing e7amples or pro2ects t)pes- settings- and polic) c!anges are ta.en from t!e :igest of (nvironmental Impact Statements- pu&lis!ed &) 6!e Information Aesource PressH Mineral e7tractions- including surface and un-derground mining as 4ell as ne4 oil and gas drilling. <a0ardous and sanitar) 4aste sites- including t!e construction and operation of disposal sites for a variet) of !a0ardous and sanitar) 4astes *also included are facilities t!at &urn or ot!er4ise destro) c!emical and to7ic 4astes+. Po4er plants- including &ot! unclear and fossil fuel electrical generating facilities and associ-ated developments. Aeservoirs- including all 4ater impoundments for flood control!)dropo4er- conservation- and recreation= and cooling la.es and diversion structures. Industrial plants *manufacturing facilities &uilt and operated &) t!e private sector- e.g.- refi-neries- steel mills- assem&l) lines+. Land use designations- e.g.- from tim&er pro-duction to 4ilderness designation. Militar) and governmental installations- including &ase closures and openings. Sc!ools- pu&lic and private- including primar)- secondar)- and universit). 6ransportation facilities- including airports- streets- terminals. Linear developments- including su&4a)s- railroads- po4er linesa1ueducts- &i.e pat!s- &ridges- pipelines- se4ers- fences- 4alls and &arrier c!annels- green &elts- and 4ater4a)s. 6rade facilities- including &usinesses and s!opping centers. :esignation of sacred sites. Par.s and preserves- refuges- cemeteries- and recreation areas.

<ousing facilities- including apartments- office &uildings- and !ospitals.

Identif) Social Impact Assessment /aria-les Social impact assessment varia&les point to measur-a&le c!ange in !uman population- communities- and social relations!ips resulting from a development pro2ect or polic) c!ange. After researc! on local communit) c!ange- rural industriali0ation- reservoir and !ig!4a) development- natural resource develop-ment- and social c!ange in general- 4e suggest a list of social varia&les under t!e general !eadings ofH 1. Population $!aracteristics 2. $ommunit) and Institutional Structures 3. Political and Social Aesources 4. Individual and >amil) $!anges ". $ommunit) Aesources ". Population Characteristics mean present population and e7pected c!angeet!nic and racial diversit)- and influ7es and outflo4s of temporar) residents as 4ell as t!e arrival of seasonal or leisure residents. *. Communit) and Institutional Structures mean t!e si0e- structure- and level of organi0ation of local government including lin.ages to t!e larger political s)stems. 6!e) also include !istorical and present patterns of emplo)ment and industrial diversification- t!e si0e and level of activit) of voluntar) associations- religious organi0ations and interests groups- and finall)!o4 t!ese institutions relate to eac! ot!er. +. Political and Social #esources refer to t!e distri&ution of po4er aut!orit)t!e interested and affected pu&lics- and t!e leaders!ip capa-&ilit) and capacit) 4it!in t!e communit) or region. ,. Individual and Famil) Chan!es refer to factors 4!ic! influence t!e dail) life of t!e individuals and families- including attitudes- perceptions- famil) c!aracteristics and friend-s!ip net4or.s. 6!ese c!anges range from attitudes to4ard t!e polic) to an alteration in famil) and friends!ip net4or.s to perceptions of ris.- !ealt!- and safet). 0. Communit) #esources Aesources include patterns of natural resource and land use= t!e availa&ilit) of !ousing and communit) services to include !ealt!police and fire protection and sanitation facilities. A .e) to t!e continuit) and survival of !uman communities are t!eir !istorical and cultural resources. /nder t!is collection of varia&les 4e also consider possi&le c!anges for indigenous people and religious su&-cultures.
Fi!ure +. Matri1 #elatin! Pro'ect Sta!e to Social Impact Assessment /aria-les

Social Impact Assessment /aria-le Population Characteristics Population $!ange (t!nic and racial distri&ution Aelocated populations Influ7 or outflo4s of temporar) 4or.ers Seasonal residents Communit) and Institutional Structures oluntar) associations Interest group activit) Si0e and structure of local government <istorical e7perience 4it! c!ange (mplo)mentEincome c!aracteristics (mplo)ment e1uit) of minorit) groups LocalEregionalEnational lin.ages IndustrialEcommercial diversit) Presence of planning and 0oning activit) Political and Social #esources :istri&ution of po4er and aut!orit) Identifications of sta.e!olders Interested and affected pu&lics Leaders!ip capa&ilit) and c!aracteristics Individual and Famil) Chan!es Perceptions of ris.- !ealt!- and safet) :isplacementErelocation concerns 6rust in political and social institutions Aesidential sta&ilit) :ensit) of ac1uaintances!ip Attitudes to4ard polic)Epro2ect >amil) and friends!ip net4or.s $oncerns a&out social 4ell-&eing Communit) #esources

Plannin!(Polic) Implementation( Operation( Decommissionin!( Development Construction Maintenance A-andonment

$!ange in communit) infrastructure 'ative American tri&es Land use patterns (ffects on cultural- !istorical- and arc!aeological resources
These !ariables are suggesti!e and illustrati!e and are only intended to pro!ide a beginning point "or the social assessor. Taylor et al., +337 4and the ).$. Forest $er!ice manual and handbook6 use the "our ma8or categories o"( population change9 li"e style9 attitudes, belie"s and !alues9 and social organi:ation. Brudge, +33;, uses the "i!e categories o" population impacts9 community and institutional arrangements9 con"licts between local residents and newcomers9 indi!idual "amily le!el impacts and community in"rastructure needs. Branch, et al., +3<;, use "our categories o" social impact assessment !ariables in their social organi:ation model( direct pro8ect inputs9 community resources9 community social organi:ation9 and indicators o" indi!idual community well1being.

Fi!ure ,. Social Impact Assessment /aria-les2 -) Pro'ect(Polic) Settin! 3t)pe4 and Sta!e Pro'ect(Polic) Sta!e Pro2ectEPolic) PlanningEPolic) $onstructionE ?perationE :ecommissionE Settings *t)pe+ :evelopment Implementation Maintenance A&andonment 6rust in political Alteration in si0e <a0ardous Perceptions of ris.Influ7 of and social of local ;aste Site !ealt! and safet) temporar) 4or.ers institutions government $!ang in $!ange in >ormation of $!ange in Industrial emplo)mentE emplo)ment attitudes to4ards communit) Plant income e1uit) of t!e pro2ect infrastructure c!aracteristics minorit) groups >orest Service 6rust in political Interested and Influ7 of :istri&ution of to Par. Service and social affected pu&lics recreation users po4erEaut!orit) Management institutions

At t!is point in discussing a SIA model 4e !ave demonstrated a conceptual procedure for &ot! e7amining and accumulating information a&out social impacts. ;e !ave also outlined a matri7 4!ic! demonstrates t!at social impacts 4ill &e different depending upon t!e pro2ect t)pe and t!e stage of development. 6!e ne7t step in t!e development of t!e social impact assessment model is to suggest t!e social impact varia&les for stages in pro2ect develop-ment given different pro2ect t)pe and setting. Com-inin! Social Impact Assessment /aria-les2 Pro'ect(Polic) Sta!e2 and Settin!

6!e four stages of pro2ectEpolic) development affect t!e social processes 4!ic! produce c!anges in c!ar-acteristics of t!e communit) or region. Social impact assessment specialists must construct a matri7 to direct t!eir investigation of potentiall) significant social impacts. Sample matrices are s!o4n in >igure 3 and 4. >or eac! pro2ectEpolic) stage- t!e assessor s!ould identif) potential impacts on eac! social varia&le identified in t!e matri7. 6!is approac! ensures t!at no critical areas are overloo.ed. ;e emp!asi0e t!at >igure 3 does not represent all social impact assess-ment varia&les t!at ma) &e of interest for an) pro2ect. It is presented to illustrate t!e issues 4!ic! represent t!e &eginning of suc! a tas.. 6!e tas. for t!e asses-sor is to spell out t!e magnitude and significance of impacts for eac! cell li.e t!ose identified in t!e illustrations. >igure 4 provides an a&&reviated illustration of !o4 SIA varia&les *as suggested in >igure 3+ mig!t &e applied 4it!in t!e conte7t of &ot! t!e setting t)pe and t!e stage of a pro2ect. 6!e first e7ample is t!e siting of a !a0ardous 4aste facilit). Perceptions a&out pro&lems of pu&lic !ealt! and safet) could emerge during t!e earl) planning stage. If a decision is made to go a!eadconstruction 4ould &e accompanied &) an influ7 of temporar) 4or.ers. In t!e case of t!e industrial plan- communit) infrastruc-ture support mig!t &e needed during construction- 4!ile c!anges in t!e industrial focus on t!e com-munit) mig!t occur during t!e operational stage. 6!ese anal)tic procedures 4ould &e repeated for eac! of t!e SIA varia&les for eac! stage of t!e pro2ect. Procedures for accomplis!ing t!is tas. are outlined in Section *principles for doing social impact asses-sment+.

Steps in the Social Impact Assessment Process

6!e social impact assessment itself s!ould contain t!e ten steps outlined in >igure ". 6!ese steps are logicall) se1uential- &ut often overlap in practice. 6!is se1uence is patterned after t!e environmental impact assessment steps as listed in t!e $(@ guidelines. ". Pu-lic Involvement 5 Develop an effective pu-lic plan to involve all potentiall) affected pu-lics. 6!is re1uires identif)ing and 4or.ing 4it! all potentiall) affected groups starting at t!e ver) &eginning of planning for t!e proposed action. 3roups affected &) proposed actions include t!ose 4!o live near&)= t!ose 4!o 4ill !ear- smell or see a development= t!ose 4!o are forced to relocate &ecause of a pro2ect= and t!ose 4!o !ave interest in a ne4 pro2ect or polic) c!ange &ut ma) not live in pro7imit). ?t!ers affected include t!ose 4!o mig!t normall) use t!e land on 4!ic! t!e pro2ect is located *suc! as farmers 4!o !ave to plo4 around

a transmission line+. Still ot!ers include t!ose affected &) t!e influ7 of seasonal residents 4!o ma) !ave to pa) !ig!er prices for food or rent- or pa) !ig!er ta7es to cover t!e cost of e7panded communit) services. ?nce identifiedrepresentative from eac! group s!ould &e s)stematicall) intervie4ed to determine potential areas of concernEimpact- and 4a)s eac! representative mig!t &e involved in t!e planning decision process. Pu&lic meet-ings &) t!emselves are inade1uate for collecting information a&out pu&lic perceptions. Surve) data can &e used to define t!e potentiall) affect-ed population. In t!is first step- t!e pieces are put in place for a pu&lic involvement program 4!ic! 4ill last t!roug!out t!e environmental and social impact assessment process. *. Identification of Alternatives 5 Descri-e the proposed action or polic) chan!e and reasona-le alternatives. In t!e ne7t step- t!e proposed action is descri&ed in enoug! detail to &egin to identif) t!e data re1uirements needed from t!e pro2ect proponent to frame t!e SIA. At a minimum- t!is includesH Locations Land re1uirements 'eeds for ancillar) facilities *roads- transmission lines- se4er and 4ater lines+ $onstruction sc!edule Si0e of t!e 4or. force *construction and operation- &) )ear or mont!+ >acilit) si0e and s!ape 'eed for a local 4or. force Institutional resources 6!e list of social impact assessment varia&les s!o4n in >igure 3 is a guide for o&-taining data from polic) or pro2ect proponents. Sometimes t!e description of t!e proposed alter-natives ma) not include all t!e information needed for an SIA. Anot!er pro&lem is t!e provision of summar) num&ers 4!en disaggregated num&ers are needed. >or e7ample- t!e social assessor ma) &e given num&ers for t!e total pea. 4or. force of a construction pro2ect- 4!en information is needed on local- in-migrating- and nonlocal commuting 4or.ers for eac! p!ase of construction. +. %aseline Conditions 5 Descri-e the relevant human environment(area of influence and -aseline conditions. 6!e &aseline conditions are t!e e7isting con-ditions and past trends associated 4it! t!e !uman environment in 4!ic! t!e proposed activit) is to ta.e place. 6!is is called t!e &aseline stud). >or construction pro2ects- a geograp!ical area is identified along 4it! t!e distri&ution of special populations at ris.= &ut for

programs- policies- or tec!nolog) assessments- t!e relevant !uman environment ma) &e a more dispersed collection of interested and affected pu&lics- interest groups- organi0ations- and insti-tutions. 6!e generic set of dimensions for inves-tigation listed &elo4 4ould include t!e follo4ing aspects of t!e !uman environment for construc-tion pro2ects and geograp!icall)-located programs and policies *t!e social impact assess-ment varia&les listed in >igure 3 re1uire similar information+H Aelations!ips 4it! t!e &iop!)sical environ-ment- including ecological setting= aspects of t!e environment seen as resources or pro&-lems= areas !aving economic- recreational- aest!etic or s)m&olic significance to specific people= residential arrangements and living patterns- including relations!ips among com-munities and social organi0ations= attitudes to4ard environmental features= and patterns of resource use. <istorical &ac.ground- including initial settle-ment and su&se1uent s!ifts in population= developmental events and eras- including e7perience 4it! &oom-&ust effects- as 4ell as a discussion of &roader emplo)ment trends= past or ongoing communit) controversies- parti-cularl) t!ose involving tec!nolog) or t!e environment= and ot!er e7periences li.el) to affect t!e level of distri&ution of t!e impacts on local receptivit) to t!e proposed action. Political and social resources- including t!e distri&ution of po4er and aut!orit)= t!e capacities of relevant s)stems or institutions *e.g.- t!e sc!ool s)stem+= friends!ip net4or.s and patterns of cleavage or cooperation among potentiall) affected groups= levels of resi-dential sta&ilit)= distri&utions of socio-demo-grap!ic c!aracteristics suc! as age and et!nicit)= presence of distinctive or potentiall) vulnera&le groups *e.g.- lo4 income+= and lin.ages among geo-political units *federal- statecount)- local and inter-local+. $ulture- attitudes and social-ps)c!ological conditions- including attitudes to4ard t!e proposed action= trust in political and social institutions- perceptions or ris.s= relevant ps)c!ological coping and ad2ustment capacit)= cultural cognition of societ) and environment= assessed 1ualit) of life= and improvement values t!at ma) &e relevant to or affected &) t!e proposed action. Population c!aracteristics including t!e demo-grap!ics of relevant groups *including all sig-nificant sta.e!olders and sensitive populations and groups+= ma2or economic activities= future prospects= t!e la&or mar.ets and availa&le 4or. force= unemplo)ment and underemplo)ment= population and e7pected c!anges= availa&ilit) of !ousinginfrastructure and services= si0e and age structure of !ouse!olds= and seasonal migration patterns.

6!e level of effort t!at is devoted to t!e description of t!e !uman environment s!ould &e commensurate 4it! t!e si0e- cost- and degree of e7pected impacts of t!e proposed action. At a minimum- t!e e7isting literature on compara&le or analogous events- .no4ledgea&le e7perts- and readil) availa&le documents suc! as government reports s!ould &e consulted. ?n-site investigations and t!e use of previous field studies and surve)s are recommended- as 4ell as rapid appraisals and mini-surve)s. ,. Scopin! 5 After o-tainin! a technical under5standin! of the proposal2 identif) the full ran!e of pro-a-le social impacts that $ill -e addressed -ased on discussion or intervie$s $ith num-ers of all potentiall) affected. After initial scoping- t!e social impact assessor selects t!e SIA varia&les for furt!er assessment situations. $onsideration needs to &e devoted &ot! to t!e impacts perceived &) t!e acting agenc) and to t!ose perceived &) affected groups and communities. 6!e principal met!ods to &e used &) e7perts and interdisciplinar) terms are revie4s of t!e e7isting social science literaturepu&lic scoping- pu&lic surve)s- and pu&lic participation tec!ni1ues. It is important for t!e vie4s of affected people to &e ta.en into consideration. Ideall)- all affected people or groups contri&ute to t!e selection of t!e varia&les assessed t!roug! eit!er a participator) process or &) revie4 and comment on t!e decision made &) responsi&le officials and t!e interdisciplinar) team. Aelevant criteria for selecting significant impacts compara&le to t!ose spelled out in t!e $(@ Aegulations *48 $>A 1"8B.2%+ include t!eH Pro&a&ilit) of t!e event occuring= 'um&er of people including indigenous populations t!at ill &e affected= :uration of impacts *long-term vs. s!ort-term+= alue of &enefits and costs to impacted groups *intensit) of impacts+= (7tent t!at t!e impact is reversi&le or can &e mitigated= Li.eli!ood of causing su&se1uent impacts= Aelevance to present and future polic) decisions= /ncertaint) over possi&le effects= and Presence or a&sence of controvers) over t!e issue.

0. Pro'ection of 6stimated 6ffects 5 Investi!ate the pro-a-le impacts. 6!e pro&a&le social impacts 4ill &e formulated in terms of predicted conditions 4it!out t!e actions *&aseline pro2ection+= predicted con-ditions 4it! t!e actions= and predicted impacts 4!ic! can &e interpreted as t!e differences &et4een t!e future 4it! and 4it!out t!e proposed action. 6!e empirical procedures is &ased

on t!e social impact assessment model outlined in Section III. Investigation of t!e pro&a&le impacts involves five ma2or sources of informationH 1+ :ata from pro2ect proponents= 2+ Aecords of previous e7perience 4it! similar actions as represented in reference literature as 4ell as ot!er (IS9s= 3+ $ensus and vital statistics= 4+ :ocuments and secondar) sources= "+ >ield researc!- including informant intervie4s- !earings- group meeting- and surve)s of t!e general population. 6!e investigation of t!e social impacts identified during scoping is t!e most important component. Met!ods of pro2ecting t!e future lie at t!e !eart of social assessment- and muc! of t!e process of anal)sis is tied up in t!is endeavor. In spite of t!e long lists of met!ods availa&le- most fall into t!e follo4ing categoriesH

Comparative method7 Strai!ht5line trend pro'ects ta.ing an e7isting trend and simpl) pro2ecting t!e same rage of c!ange into t!e future+= Population multiplier methods*eac! specified increase in population implies designated multiples of some ot!er varia&le- e.g. 2o&s- !ousing units+= Scenarios*1+ logical-imaginations &ased on construction of !)pot!etical futures t!roug! a process of mentall) modeling t!e assumptions a&out t!e varia&les in 1uestion= and *2+ fitted empirical-similar past cases used to anal)0e t!e present case 4it! e7perts ad2usting t!e scenario &) ta.ing into account t!e uni1ue c!aracteristics of t!e present case= 61pert testimon)*e7perts can &e as.ed to present scenarios and assess t!eir implications+= Computer modelin!modeling *involving t!e mat!ematical formulation of premises and a process of 1uantitative 4eig!ing of varia&les+= Calculation of 8future fore!one8 5 *a num&er of met!ods !ave &een formulated to determine 4!at options 4ould &e given up irrevoca&l) as a result of a plan or pro2ect- e.g.- river recreation and agricultural land use after t!e &uilding of a dam+.

6!e record of previous e7periences is ver) important to t!e estimation of future impacts. It is largel) contained in case reports and studies and t!e e7perience of e7perts. ariations in t!e patterns of impacts and responses in t!ese cases also s!ould &e registered. (7pert .no4ledge is used to enlarge t!is .no4ledge &ase

and to 2udge !o4 t!e stud) case is li.el) to deviate from t!e t)pical patterns. 6!e documents and secondar) sources provide information on e7isting conditions- plans- reported attitudes and opinions= and contri&ute to t!e case record. 6!e field researc! involves intervie4s 4it! persons 4!o !ave different interests at sta.e- different perspectives- and different .inds of e7pertise. ;!erever feasi&le- it s!ould also involve a searc! t!roug! a 4ide range of documentation t!at is often availa&le *in forms t!at range from official statistics and t!e minute of meeting to t!e patterns of coverage and letters to t!e editors+. 6!e opinions of various individuals and groups to4ard t!e proposed c!ange s!ould also &e part of t!e record. Surve)s are valua&le to assess pu&lic opinion properl)- &ecause spo.es-persons for groups do not al4a)s represent t!e vie4s of t!e ran.-and-file. Statements at pu&lic meeting and &) spo.espersons s!ould not &e used as pro2ections- &ut as possi&le impacts to &e evaluated t!roug! ot!er means. 9. Predictin! #esponses to Impacts 5 Determine the si!nificance to the identified social impacts. 6!is is a difficult assessment tas. often avoided- &ut t!e responses of affected parties fre1uentl) 4ill !ave significant su&se1uent impacts. After direct impacts !ave &een estimated t!e assessor must ne7t estimate !o4 t!e affected people 4ill respond in terms of attitude and actions. 6!eir attitudes &efore implementation predicts t!eir attitudes after4ardst!oug! t!ere are increasing data t!at s!o4 fears are often over&lo4n and t!at e7pected *often promised+ &enefits fail to meet e7pectations. 6!is literature s!ould &e consulted. 6!e actions of affected groups are to &e esti-mated using compara&le cases and intervie4s 4it! affected people a&out 4!at t!e) e7pect to do. So muc! depends on 4!et!er local leader-s!ip arises *and t!e o&2ectives and strategies of t!ese leaders+- t!at t!is assessment step often is !ig!l) uncertain- &ut at least polic) ma.ers 4ill &e notified of potential pro&lems and une7pected results. 6!is step is also important &ecause adaption and response of affected parties can !ave conse-1uences of t!eir o4n-4!et!er for t!e agenc) t!at proposes an action *as 4!en political pro-tests stalls a proposal+ or for t!e affected communities- 4!et!er in t!e s!ort-term or in t!e long-term *as in t!e previousl) noted e7ample of Morgan $it)- Louisiana+. Patterns in previous assessments guide t!is anal)sis- and e7pert 2udgment and field investi-gations are used to see 4!et!er t!e) stud) case in follo4ing t!e t)pical patterns or !o4 it is de-veloping uni1uel). Being a&le to s!o4 potentiall) affected people t!at significant impacts are &eing incorporated into t!e assessment is critical to t!e success of t!is step. :. Indirect and Cumulative Impacts 5 6stimate su-se;uent impacts and

cumulative impacts. Indirect impacts are t!ose caused &) t!e direct impacts= t!e) often occur later t!an t!e direct im-pact- or fart!er a4a). $umulative impacts are t!ose impacts 4!ic! result from t!e incremental impacts of an action added to ot!er past- present- and reasona&l) foreseea&le future actions regard-less of 4!ic! agenc) or person underta.es t!em *see 48 $>A 1"8B.%+. A communit) residential and retail gro4t! and pressures on government services follo4ing t!e siting of a ma2or pro2ect are e7amples of indirect and cumulative impacts. ;!ile t!e) are more difficult to estimate precise-l) t!an direct and cumulative impacts &e clearl) identified in t!e SIA.
Fi!ure 9. United States Federal e!islation and 61ecutive Orders Addressin! #esource Development and Socioeconomic Miti!ation date Fedearl la$ Socioeconomic Miti!ation 1,28Mineral Leasing Act *41 Stat 44,+ Allo4ed 3%."I of receipts to &e returned to local government for sc!ools and roads= re1uired protection of su&sistence !a&itats. $oastal (nerg) Impact Program Places >ederal government in a secondar) role &e!ind State and local governments. Ae1uired !uman and communit) conditions to &e considered in t!e assessment process. Increased percent of revenues for socioeconomic mitigation. Ae1uired revenues received &) States to go to impacted areas. Increased t!e amount of receipts to "8I and &roadened categories of receipts t!at could &e spend on courts- se4ers- infrastructureetc.

1,#,'ational (nvironmental Polic) Act

1,%">ederal $oal Leasing Amendments Act 1,%#>ederal Land Polic) Management Act 1,%#Mineral Leasing Act Amendments

1,%BPo4er Plant and Industrial >uel /se Act >ederal government can pa) for planning and land ac1uisition for !ousing and communit) facilities in coalEuranium development. 1,%B:efense (conomic ad2ustment programs (conomic ad2ustment committee and encourages uniform (7ecutive ?rder economic impact anal)sis and information s!aring. 1,B1Militar) $onstruction and Aut!ori0ation Allo4s up to J1 million of >ederal funds per count) for impacts. Act

<. Chan!es in Alternatives 5 #ecommended ne$ or chan!ed alternatives and estimate or pro'ect their conse;uences. (ac! ne4 alternative or recommended c!ange s!ould &e assessed separatel). 6!e met!ods used in step five *estimation+- appl) !ere &ut usuall) on a more modest scale. More innova-tive alternatives and c!anges pro&a&le s!ould &e presented in an e7perimental structure. (7pert 2udgment and scenarios are !elpful in developing pro2ect and polic) alternations. 6!e num&er of iterations !ere 4ill depend upon time- funding- and t!e magnitude of t!e pro2ect or polic) c!anges. =. Miti!ation 5 Develop a miti!ation plan. A social impact assessment not onl) forecasts impacts- it s!ould identif) means to mitigate adverse impacts. Mitigation includes avoiding t!e impact &) not ta.ing or modif)ing an action= minimi0ing- rectif)ing- or reducing t!e impacts t!roug! t!e design or operation of t!e pro2ect or polic)= or compensating for t!e impact &) providing su&stitute facilities- resources- or opportunities *see 48 $>A 1"8B.28+. Ideall)- mitigation measures are &uilt into t!e selected alternative- &ut it is appropriate to identif) mitigation measures even if t!e) are not immediatel) adopted or if t!e) 4ould &e t!e responsi&ilit) of anot!er person or government unit. *>ederal legislation 4!ic! mandates mitigation measures is s!o4n in >igure #.+ ;e suggest a se1uencing strateg) to manage social impacts modeled after one used 4it! 4et-land protection and ot!er natural resource issues. :uring t!e first se1uence- 4etlands managers strive to avoid all adverse impacts. In t!e second se1uence- managers strive to minimi0e an) adverse impacts t!at cannot &e avoided. :uring t!e t!ird se1uence- managers compensate for adverse impacts. $ompensation for t!e loss of a 4etland- for e7ample- could &e to ac1uire a different 4etland- en!ance a degraded site- or create a ne4 4etland. 6!e amount of compensation can &e &ased on t!e t)pe of 4etland or resource lostt!e severit) of t!e impact- and t!e location of t!e 4etland mitigation site. 6!e t4o steps of se1uencing-avoiding and minimi0ing-can appl) to t!e pro2ect itself or to t!e !ost communit) or t!e impacted region. >or e7ample- t!e pro2ect ma) &e revised to avoid or minimi0e adverse social impacts *e.g.- e7tend t!e construction period to minimi0e in-migration+- or t!e communit) ma) &e a&le to ta.e steps to attenuate- if not avoid- and adverse effects. Application of t!e se1uencing concept for t!e mitigation of adverse social impacts re1uires t!at t!e assessor first ran. t!e level of importance of eac! significant SIA varia&le determined during t!e estimated effects step. 6!e first step in evaluating potential miti-gation for eac! varia&le is to

determine 4!et!er t!e proponent could modif) t!e pro2ect or pro-posed polic) to avoid t!e adverse effects. >or e7ample- a road t!at displaces families could &e rerouted. 6!e ne7t step in t!e se1uencing pro-cess is to identif) 4a)s to minimi0e adverse social impacts. >or e7ample- most citi0ens are uncomforta&le 4it! t!e idea of locating a per-ceived as undesira&le facilit) near t!eir communit). Attitudes *particularl) negative ones+ formed a&out t!e pro2ect cannot &e eliminated- &ut mig!t &e moderated if t!e pu&lic !as com-plete information a&out t!e proposed develop-ment- are included in t!e decision ma.ing processor are provided 4it! structural arrange-ments t!at assure safe operations. 6!ere are at least t!ree &enefits of identi-f)ing unresolva&le social impacts t!at ma) result from a proposed pro2ect. 6!e first is identif)ing met!ods of compensating individuals and t!e communit) for unavoida&le impacts- 6!e second occurs 4!en t!e communit) ma) identif) 4a)s of en!ancing ot!er 1ualit) of life varia&les as compensation or t!e adverse effects. 6!e t!ird !appens 4!en t!e identification of unre-solva&le social impacts ma.es communit) leaders and pro2ect proponents more sensitive to t!e feelings of communit) residents. B) articulating t!e impacts t!at 4ill occur and ma.ing efforts to avoid or minimi0e t!e adverse conse1uences- or compensating t!e residents or t!e communit) for t!e losses- &enefits ma) &e en!anced and avoida&le conflicts can &e managed or minimi0ed. ">. Monitorin! ? Develop a monitorin! pro!ram. A monitoring program s!ould &e developed t!at is capa&le of identif)ing deviations from t!e proposed action and an) important unanticipated impacts. A monitoring plan s!ould &e developed to trac. pro2ect and program development and compare real impacts 4it! pro2ected ones. It s!ould spell out *to t!e degree possi&le+ t!e nature and e7tent of additional steps t!at s!ould ta.e place 4!en unanticipated impacts or impacts larger t!an t!e pro2ections occur. Monitoring programs are particularl) necessar) for pro2ects and programs t!at lac. detailed information or t!at !ave !ig! varia&ilit) or uncertaint). It is important to recogni0e- in advance- t!e potential for 5surprises5 t!at ma) lie completel) outside t!e range of options considered &) t!e SIA. If monitoring procedures cannot &e ade1uatel) implemented- t!en miti-gation agreements s!ould ac.no4ledge t!e un-certaint) faced in implementing t!e decision. It9s generall) onl) at t!is stage t!at t!e communit) or affected group !as t!e influence to 5get it in 4riting.5 A recent e7ample of a moni-toring program 4it! su&se1uent provision for mitigation 4as negotiated &et4een t!e /.S. :epartment of (nerg)- t!e State of 6e7as and t!e Super $onducting Super $ollider La&orator). 6!e process allo4ed for t!e pa)ment of appro7i-matel)

JB88-888 to local 2urisdictions to monitor t!e impacts of t!e construction activit).

Principles for Social Impact Assessment

In general- t!ere is consensus on t!e t)pes of impacts t!at need to &e considered *social- cultural- demo-grap!ic- economic- social-ps)c!ological- and often political impacts+= on t!e need for t!e SIA to include a discussion of t!e proposed action *i.e.- t!e proposed facilit)- pro2ect- development- polic) c!ange- etc.+= on t!e components of t!e !uman environment 4!ere t!e impacts are li.el) to &e felt *affected neig!&or-!oods- communities- or regions+= on t!e li.el) im-pacts *generall) defined as t!e difference &et4een t!e li.el) future of t!e affected !uman environment 4it! versus 4it!out t!e proposed polic) and pro2ect+= and on t!e steps t!at could &e ta.en to en!ance positive impacts and to mitigate an) negative ones *&) avoid-ing t!em- if possi&le- &) modification and minimi0a-tion- and &) providing compensation for an) negative impacts t!at cannot &e avoided or ameliorated+. As SIA te7t&oo.s point out Brudge- 1,,4= Branc! et.al.- 1,B4= >inster&usc!1,B8= >reuden&urg- 1,B#= 6a)lor- et.al.- 1,,8+ and as suggested &) t!e $ouncil of (nvironmental @ualit) *$(@+ Aegulations for Implementing t!e Procedural Provisions of '(PA */.S. $ouncil on (nvironmental @ualit)- 1,B#+ t!e SIA practitioner s!ould focus on t!e more significant impacts- s!ould provide 1uantification 4!ere feasi&le and appropriate- and s!ould present t!e social impacts in a manner t!at can &e understood &) decision-ma.ers and communit) leaders. 6!e follo4ing principles augment t!e guidance provided in earlier sections. 6!ese principles are &enc!mar.s for conducting an SIA. 6!e) include t!eH Doint role of SIA and pu&lic involvement in identif)ing affected groups= $oncept of impact e1uit) *4!oe 54ins5 and 4!o 5loses5+ as it concerns sensitive groups= >ocus of an SIAK6!e possi&le impacts identified &) t!e affected pu&lic and impacts identified t!roug! social science e7pertise= (7plicit identification met!ods- assumptions- and determination of significance= >eed&ac. to pro2ect planners= /se of SIA practitioners to do SIA= (sta&lis!ment of mitigation and monitoring or as 2oint agenc)communit) responsi&ilit)= Identif)ing appropriate data source for SIA= and Planning for gaps in data.

". Involve the Diverse Pu-lic ? Identif) and involve all potentiall) affected !roups and individuals. A pu&lic involvement and conflict management program can &eneficiall) &e closel) integrated 4it! t!e development of t!e social impact assessment process. A lac. of understanding still e7ists among man) decision-ma.ers as to !o4 pu&lic involvement fit 4it!in t!e planning process. Pu&lic involvement can complement and fit 4it!in SIA process &) identif)ing poten-tiall) affected groups- and &) interpreting t!e meaning of impacts for eac! group. Pu&lic involvement pla)s an important role in recruiting participants for t!e planning process 4!o are trul) representative of affected groups. Pu&lic involvement s!ould &e trul) interactive- 4it! communication flo4ing &ot! 4a)s &et4een t!e agenc) and affected groups. *. Anal)@e Impact 6;uit) ? Clearl) identif) $ho $ill $in or $ho $ill lose2 and emphasi@e vulnera-ilit) under5represented !roups. Impacts s!ould &e specified differentiall) af-fected groups and not 2ust measured in t!e aggre-gate. Identification of all groups li.el) to &e affected an agenc) action is central to t!e concept of impact e1uit). 6!ere can al4a)s &e 4inners and losers as t!e result of a decision to construct a dam- &uild a !ig!4a) or close an area to tim&er !arvesting- <o4ever- no categor) of persons- particularl) t!ose t!at mig!t &e considered more sensitive or vulnera&le as a result of age- gender- et!nicit)- race- occupation or ot!er factors- s!ould !ave to &ear t!e &runt of adverse social impacts. ;!ile most proposed pro2ects or policies are not 0ero-sum situations- and t!ere ma) &e var)ing &enefits for almost all involved- SIA !as a special dut) to identif) t!ose 4!ose adverse impacts mig!t get lost in t!e aggregate &enefits.
Fi!ure :. Principles for Social Impact Assessment A Involve the diverse pu-lic Identify and involve all potentially affected groups and individuals A Anal)@e impact e;uit) Clearly identify who will win and who will lose and emphasize vulnerability of under-represented groups A Focus the assessment Deal with issues and public concerns that really count, not those that are just easy to count A Identif) methods and assumptions and define si!nificance Describe how the SIA is conducted, what assumptions are used and how significance is determined A Provide feed-ac& on social impacts to pro'ect planners Identify problems that could be solved with changes to the proposed action or alternatives A Use SIA practitioners !rained social scientist employing social science methods will provide the best results A 6sta-lish monitorin! and miti!ation pro!rams

"anage uncertainty by monitoring and mitigating adverse impacts A Identif) data sources #se published scientific literature, secondary data and primary data from the affected area A Plan for !aps in data $valuate the missing information, and develop a strategy for proceeding

6!e impact assessment practitioner must &e attentive to t!ose groups t!at lac. political efficac)= suc! as groups lo4 in political or economic po4er 4!ic! often are not !eard- or do not !ave t!eir interests strongl) represented. (7amples a&ound in t!e literature of groups t!at could &e considered sensitivevulnera&le- or lo4 in po4er. 6!e elderl) !ave &een identified as a categor) of persons sensitive to involuntar) displacement and relocation. $!ildren !ave suffered learning pro&lems resulting from long-term e7posure to various forms of transportation noise and local pollution *e.g.- ve!icular traffic- airports+. Minorities and t!e poor are disproportionatel) represented in groups lo4 in po4er= lo4-income= minorit) neig!&or!oods fre1uentl) 4ere targeted in t!e 1,#89s as optimal sites for road construction and similar pu&lic 4or.s pro2ects. Persons 4it! some form of disa&ilit) or impairment constitute anot!er sensitive categor) 4it! important needs. >armers often are affected &) transmission lines- 4ater pro2ects or developments t!at ta.e large amounts of land. 6!e special impacts to t!ose persons s!ould &e !ig!-lig!ted in an SIA- not lost in summar) statistics. +. Focus the Assessment ? Deal $ith issues and pu-lic concerns that reall) count2 not those that are 'ust eas) to count. Impacts Identified -) the Pu-lic. Social impact assessment practitioners must contend 4it! stringent time and resource constraints t!at affect t!e scope of t!e assessment and !o4 muc! can &e done in t!e time availa&le. 3iven suc! constraints- a central 1uestion emergesH 5If )ou cannot cover t!e social universe- 4!at s!ould )ou focus onL5 6!e ans4er is to focus on t!e most significant impacts in order of priorit)- and all significant impacts for all impacted groups must &e identified earl) using a variet) of rapid appraisal or investigative tec!ni1ues. $learl)- impacts identified as important &) t!e pu&lic must &e given !eig! priorit). Man) of t!ese 4ill surface during t!e '(PA scoping process or earlier if a surve) is used to identif) t!e potentiall)-affected populations. <o4ever- as noted earliersome groups lo4 in po4er t!at ma) &e adversel) affected do not necessaril) participate in earl) pro2ect stages. It is essential t!at &roadl)-&ased pu&lic involvement occur t!roug!out t!e life of t!e SIA= &ut additional means *e.g.-

.e) informants- participant o&servation- and 4!ere possi&le- surve)s+ often must &e used to ensure t!at t!e most significant pu&lic concerns are addressed. Impacts Identified -) SIA Practitioners. SIA practitioners !ave t!e e7pertise to !elp prioriti0e issues using a revie4 of literature and profes-sional e7perience. ?ften t!e) 4ill suggest t!e stud) of issues unrecogni0ed &) eit!er t!e pu&lic or t!e agencies. ,. Identif) Methods and Assumptions and Define Si!nificance ? Descri-e ho$ the SIA is conducted2 $hat assumptions are used and ho$ si!nificance is determined. 6!e met!ods and assumptions used in t!e SIA s!ould &e made availa&le and pu&lis!ed prior to a decision in order to allo4 decision ma.ers as 4ell t!e pu&lic to evaluate t!e assessment of impacts *as re1uired &) '(PA+. Practitioners 4ill need to consult t!e $(@ Aegulations. :efinitions and e7amples of effects *direct- indirect- and cumulative+ are provided in 48 $>A 1"8B.% and 1"8B.B= 5effects5 and 5impacts5 are used s)non)mousl). 6!e $(@ regulations are clear t!at an environmental impacts statement !as to focus on impacts found to &e significant. Significance in terms of conte7t and intensit) considerations is defined in 48 $>A 1"8B.2%. $onte7t includes suc! considerations as societ) as a 4!oleaffected regions- affected interests and localit) *e.g.- 4!en considering sitespecific pro2ects- local impacts assume greater importance t!an t!ose of a regional nature+. Intensit) refers to t!e dimensions presented under Scoping in Section I - as 4ell as consideration of !ealt! and safet)- endangered species or uni1ue !uman resources- precedents and la4s. ;!ile t!ese criteria are !elpful in 2udging significance- t!e SIA practitioner also needs to consult individual agenc) procedures for '(PA compliance. Some of t!ese list additional social impacts t!at t!e agenc) must consider even if not al4a)s significant. 0. Pro'ect Planners ? Identif) pro-lems that could -e solved $ith chan!es to the proposed action or alternatives. Provide Feed-ac& on Social Impacts to >indings from t!e SIA s!ould feed &ac. into pro2ect design to mitigate adverse impacts and en!ance positive ones. 6!e impact assessment- t!erefores!ould &e designed as a d)namic process involving c)cles of pro2ect designassessment- redesign- and reassessment. 6!is process is often carried out informall) 4it! pro2ect designers prior to pu&lication of t!e draft assessment for pu&lic comment= pu&lic comments on a draft (IS can contri&ute importantl) to t!is process of feed&ac. and modification. 9. Use SIA Practitioners ? .rained social scientists emplo)in! social

science methods $ill provide the -est results. 6!e need for professionall) 1ualified- competent people 4it! social science training and e7perience cannot &e overemp!asi0ed. An e7perienced SIA practitioner 4ill .no4 t!e data- and &e familiar and conversant 4it! e7isting social science evidence pertaining to impacts t!at !ave occurred else4!ere4!ic! ma) &e relevant to t!e impact area in 1uestion. 6!is &readt! of .no4ledge and e7perience can prove invalua&le in identif)ing important impacts t!at ma) not surface as pu&lic concerns or as mandator) considerations found in agenc) '(PA compliance procedures. A social scientist 4ill &e a&le to identif) t!e full range of important impacts and t!en 4ill &e a&le to select t!e appropriate measurement procedures. <aving social scientist as part of t!e interdisciplinar) (IS team 4ill also reduce t!e pro&a&ilit) t!at an important social impact could go unrecogni0ed. In assessing social impacts- if t!e evidence for a potential t)pe of impact is not definitive in eit!er direction- t!en t!e appropriate conservative conclusion is t!at it cannot &e ruled out 4it! confidence. In addition- it is important t!at t!e SIA practitioner &e conversant 4it! t!e tec!nical and &iological perspectives &roug!t to &ear on t!e pro2ect- as 4ell as t !e cultural and proecdural conte7t of t!e agenc) t!e) 4or. 4it!. :. 6sta-lish Monitorin! and Miti!ation Pro!ram ? Mana!e uncertaint) -) monitorin! and miti!ation adverse impacts. $rucial to t!e SIA process is monitoring significant social impact varia&les and an) programs 4!ic! !ave &een put into place to mitigate t!em. As indicated earlier- t!e identification of impacts mig!t depend on t!e specification of contingencies. >or e7ample- if t!e in-migration of 4or.ers during t!e construction p!ase 4or. force is 1888- t!en t!e communit)9s !ousing 4ill &e inade1uate to meet t!e need- &ut if it is onl) "88- t!en t!e impact can &e accommodated &) currentl) vacant units. Identif)ing a monitoring infrastructure needs a .e) element of t!e local planning process. 64o .e) pointsH a4Monitoring and mitigation s!ould &e a 2oint agenc) and communit) responsi&ilit). -4 Bot! activities s!ould occur on an iterative &asis t!roug!out t!e pro2ect life c)cle. :epending on t!e nature of t!e pro2ect and time !ori0ons for completion- t!e focus of long-term responsi&ilit) for monitoring and mitigation is not easil) defined. Aesearc! s!o4s t!at trust and e7pertise are .e) factors in c!oosing t!e &alance &et4een agenc) and communit) monitoring participation. >e4 agencies !ave t!e resources to continue t!ese activities for an e7tended period- &ut local communities s!ould &e provided resources to assume a portion of t!e monitoring and mitigation responsi&ilities.

<. Identif) Data Source ? Pu-lished scientific literature2 secondar) data2 and primar) data from the affected area. 6!ese t!ree sources s!ould &e consulted for all SIA9s. Balance among t!e t!ree ma) var) according to t!e t)pe of t!e proposed action- as 4ell as specific considerations noted &elo4- &ut all t!ree 4ill &e relevant. Pu-lished Scientific iterature M 6!e SIA s!ould dra4 on e7istingpreviousl) revie4ed and screened social science literature 4!ic! summari0es e7isting .no4ledge of impacts &ased on accepted scientific standards. (7amples include 2ournal articles- &oo.s- and reports availa&le from similar pro2ects. A list of eas)-to-o&tain- recommended sources is provided at t!e end of t!is monograp!. (7isting documentation is useful in identif)ing 4!ic! social impacts are li.el) to accompan) a proposed action. ;!en it is possi&le to dra4 potentiall) competing interpretations from t!e e7isting literature- t!e SIA s!ould provide a careful discussion of relative met!odological merits of availa&le studies. As pointed out in Section III- t!e &est guidance for future e7pectations is past e7perience= t!erefore- consideration of e7isting literature s!ould err on t!e side of inclusiveness- not on e7clusion of potentiall) relevant cases. $aution is needed 4!en t!e SIA presents a conclusion t!at is contradicted &) t!e pu&lis!ed literature= in suc! cases- t!e reasons for t!e differences s!ould &e e7plicitl) addressed. Ant!ropological data on rural and et!nicall)- and raciall)diverse communities is &est understanding t!e cultural conte7t of t!e impacted communit). Secondar) Data Sources -6!e &est .no4n secondar) sources of t!ese are t!e $ensus- vital statistics- geograp!ical data- relevant agenc) pu&lications- and routine data collected &) state and federal agencies. (7amples of ot!er secondar) data sources include agenc) caseload statistics *e.g.- from mental !ealt! centers- social service agencies and ot!er !uman service providers- la4 enforcement agencies- and insurance and financial regula-tor) agencies+= pu&lis!ed and unpu&lis!ed !istorical materials *often availa&le in local li&raries- !istorical societies- and sc!ool district files+= complaints produced &) &ooster andEor service organi0ations *suc! c!am&ers of commerce- 4elcome 4agon organi0ations- and c!urc! groups+= and t!e files of local ne4s-papers. 6!ese secondar) sources can &e used in con2unction 4it! .e)-informant intervie4s- to allo4 for verification of informant memories and to &e alert for potential sources of &ias in ot!er data. Primar) Data from the Affected Area5Surve) researc!- oral !istories and informant intervie4s are e7amples of primar) data 4!ic! ma) &e collected to verif) ot!er data sources. If a social assessor concludes t!at communit) impacts

4ill differ from t!ose documented else4!ere- suc! conclusions must &e &ased on t!e collection and anal)sis of primar) data 4!ic! specificall) s!o4 4!) suc! alternative conclusions are more credi&le. Also- local residents often !ave important forms of e7pertise- &ot! a&out local socioeconomic conditions and a&out t!e &roader range of li.el) impacts. Because of its uni1ue !istor) and structure- eac! communit) ma) react to a development event polic) c!ange differentl) t!an ot!er communities. =. Plan for Gaps in Data SIA practitioners often !ave to produce an assessment in t!e a&sence of all t!e relevant or even t!e necessar) data. 6!e t!ree elements of t!is principle are intended to supplement t!e guidance alread) provided &) $(@ Aegulations at 48 $>A 1"82.22.
;!en an agenc) is evaluating reasona&l) foreseea&le significant adverse effects on t!e !uman environment in an environmental impact statement and t!ere is incomplete or unavaila&le information- t!e agenc) s!all al4a)s ma.e clear t!at suc! information is lac.ing.*a+ If t!e incomplete informationCis essential to a reasoned c!oice among alternatives and t!e overall costs of o&taining it are not e7or&itant- t!e agenc) s!all include t!e information in t!e environmental impact statement.

?nl) if t!e relevant information 5cannot &e o&tained &ecause t!e overall costs of o&taining it are e7or&itant or t!e means to o&tain it are not .no4n-5 is t!e (IS permitted a gap in relevant information. In suc! cases- !o4ever- t!e (IS needs to includeH 1+ a statement of relevance of t!e incomplete or unavaila&le informationC 2+ a summar) of e7isting credi&le scientific evidence Ft!atG is relevantC- and 3+ t!e agenc)9s evaluation of t!e li.el) and possi&le impacts &ased upon t!eoretical approac!es or researc! met!ods generall) accepted in t!e scientific communit) *48 $>A 1"82.22+. 6!e follo4ing t!ree elements are accepta&le procedures to t!e social science communit) 4!en t!ere are s!ortages of resources necessar) to do t!e desired data collection. It is more important to identif) li&el) social impacts than to precisel) ;uantif) the more o-vious social impacts. All assessors strive to identif) and 1uantif) significant impacts- t!ere&) providing decision ma.ers and t!e affected pu&lics 4it! information t!at is &ot! as complete and as accurate as possi&le. In cases 4!ere t!e desira&le goal cannot &e met- it is &etter to &e roug!l) correct on important issues t!an to &e precisel) correct on unimportant issues ;it!in t!e conte7t of t!e social impact statement- t!ere are t4o

important differences &et4een impact identification *4!at are t!e general categories or t)pes of impacts t!at are li.el) to occur Fsee >igure 3G+ and impact evaluation *precisel) !o4 significant and t!ose impacts li.el) to &e+. Aesearc! !as identified t!e social impacts of man) t)pes of actions- and e7perienced SIA practitioner can identif) plausi&le and potentiall) significant impacts relativel) 1uic.l) and efficientl). ?n t!e ot!er !andan accurate evaluation is a resource-intensive process and deals 4it! t!e 1uestion of significance. Aesearc! on t!e decision-ma.ing process !as found t!at e7perts and polic) ma.ers 4ere particularl) prone to4ard premature closure. 3iven a partial listing of potential impacts e7perts tended to assume t!e) !ave &een given a complete list and in most casesfailed to recogni0e t!e potential i mpacts t!at !ad &een omitted from consideration. ;!ile empirical estimates can appear to &e 1uite precisedemograp!ic and economic pro2ections !ave &een s!o4n &) empirical anal)sis to !ave an average a&solute error in t!e range of "8-188 percent. ;e support t!e use of 1ualitative and 1uantitative measures of social impact assessment varia&les- &ut reali0e t!at t!e evaluation of significance !as an important 2udgment component. It is important to -e on the 8conservative8 side in reportin! li&el) social impacts. 6!e purpose of t!e (IS us is to provide an even!anded treatment of t!e potential impacts- offering a scientificall) reasona-le assessment of the pro-a-le impacts in advance of t!e development event. It is a ver) different matter from providin! solid proof of impacts after t!e impacts occur and all t!e evidence is inN All (IS9s and SIA9s are &) t!eir nature anticipator). @uestions a&out t!e 5prooof5 of impacts can &e as.ed in an apparentl) scientific language- &ut cannot &e ans4ered 4it! t!e true confidence in advance of t!e actions in 1uestion. In assessing social and economic impacts- accordingl)- if t!e evidence for a potential t)pe of impact is not definitive in eit!er direction- t!e conservative conclusion is t!at t!e impact cannot -e ruled out $ith confidence- not t!at t!e impact is not proven. In cases of dou&t- in terms of statistical terminolog)- t!e proper interpretation is t!e 6)pe II test for po4er or sensitivit)- and not t!e 6)pe I test for t!e strengt! of consistenc) of an association. .he less relia-le data there are on the effects of the pro'ects or polic) chan!e2 the more important it is to have SIA $or& performed -) competent2 professional social scientists.Aesource limitations 4ill not al4a)s allo4 for SIA9s to &e done &) e7perienced social scientists. 6!e t4o follo4ing situations are ones in 4!ic! it ma) &e appropriate to

proceed 4it!out professional social scientists9 involvement in an SIA. 1+ In cases 4!ere proposed actions are considered &) persons 4it!in t!e agenc) 4it! social science training- and &) t!ose in t!e potentiall) affected communit)- to li.el) cause onl) negligi&le or ep!emeral social impacts. 2+ In cases 4!ere a significant &od) of empirical findings is availa&le from t!e social science literature- 4!ic! can &e applied fairl) directl) to t!e proposed action in 1uestion- and is referenced2 summari@ed2 and cited &) t!e person*s+ preparing t!e SIA section of t!e (IS. If one of t!ese t4o conditions is not present- t!e a&sence of professional social science e7pertise 4ould &e imprudent for &ot! t!e agenc) and affected groups and communities= and SIA 4ould &e speculative and not 4ell grounded. If one of t!ese t4o conditions is not present- t!e a&sence of professional social science e7pertise 4ould &e imprudent for &ot! t!e agenc) and affected groups and communities= and SIA 4ould &e speculative and not 4ell grounded.

Conclusion
Social impact assessment is predicted on t!e notion t!at decision-ma.ers s!ould understand t!e conse1uences of t!eir decisions &efore t!e) actand t!at t!e people affected 4ill not onl) &e appraised of t!e effects- &ut !ave t!e opportunit) to participate in designing t!eir future. 6!e social environment is different t!an t!eir future. 6!e social environment is different t!an t!e natural environment &ecause it reacts in anticipation of c!ange- &ut can adapt in reasoned 4a)s to c!anging circumstance in part of t!e planning process. In addition- persons in different social settings interpret c!ange in different 4a)s- and react in different 4a)s. Per!aps &ecause of t!is comple7it)- or t!e political conse1uences of ma.ing e7plicit t!e social conse1uences of pro2ects and programs- social impact assessment !as not &een 4ell-integrated into agenc) decision Mma.ing. 6!e guidelines and principles presented !erein are designed to assist agencies and ot!er institutions in implementing SIA 4it!in t!e conte7t of '(PA process. If a 4ell-prepared SIA is integrated into t!e decisionma.ing process- &etter decisions 4ill result.

Accessi-le Social Impact Assessment iterature

Te!tboo"s and Guides Branch, Kristi, Douglas A. Hooper, James Thompson and James C. Creighton. 1983. uide

to !ocial "mpact Assessment. Boulder, C#$ %est&ie' (ress, "!B) *+8,-31+.1.+8. Brudge, /a0el J. 1991 A communit2 uide to !ocal "mpact Assessment, 3iddleton, %" 4(.#. Bo5 ,6*8,37$ !ocial 8colog2 (ress, 61* pages. 9reuden0urg, %illiam /. 198,. :!ocial "mpact Assessment.: Annual /e&ie' o; !ociolog2 16$1-1+1.8. Ta2lor, C. )icholas, C. Ho0son Br2an and Colin C. oodrich. 199*. !ocial Assessment$ Theor2, (rocess and Techni<ues. !tudies in /esource 3anagement Center ;or /esource 3anagement, (.#. Bo5 -,, =incoln >ni&ersit2, )e' ?ealand. #egulations and Administrati$e Procedures Atherton, Carol Coop. 19... :=egal /e<uirements ;or 8n&ironmental "mpact /eporting.: (p. 9+,1 in James 3c8n&o2 """ and Thomas Diet@, Hand0ooA ;or 8n&ironmental (lanning$ The !ocial Conse<uences o; 8n&ironmental Change. )e' BorA$ %ile2. Jordan, %illiam !. """. 1981. :(s2chological Harm A;ter (A)8$ )8(ACs /e<uirements to Consider (s2chological Damage.: Har&ard 8n&ironmental =a' /e&ie' 8$--+8.. =le'ell2n, =2nn . and %illiam /. 9reuden0urg. 199*. :=egal /e<uirements ;or !ocial "mpact Assessments$ Assessing the !ocial !cience 9allout ;rom Three 3ile "sland.: !ociet2 and )atural /esources 6437$ 193+6*8. 3eidinger, 8rrol 8. and %illiam /. 9reuden0urg. 1983. :The =egal !tatus o; !ocial "mpact Assessments$ /ecent De&elopments.: 8n&ironmental !ociolog2 31$3*+33. >.!. Council o; 8n&ironment Dualit2. 198,. /egulation o; "mplementing the (rocedural (ro&isions o; the )ational 8n&ironmental (olic2 Act 41* C9/ 1-**+1-*87. %ashington$ o&ernment (rinting #;;ice, %ashington, D.C. 6*1*6 (u0lic =a' 91+9*, The )ational 8n&ironmental (olic2 Act o; 19,9, as Amended 4(.=. 91+-6 and (.=. 91+837 16 >.!.C. 13361+131.. SIA Methodology 9inster0usch, Kurt and C. (. %old 4eds.7 1981. 3ethodolog2 o; !ocial "mpact Assessment. 6nd 8dition. !trouds0urg, (A$ Hutchinson /oss, "!B) *+8.933+1*1+*. 9inster0usch, Kurt, =2nn . =le'ell2n, and C.(. %ol; 4eds.7 1983. !ocial "mpact Assessment

)o. .,

3ethods. Be&erl2 Hills, CA$ !age, "!B) *+8*39+6116. 9inster0usch, Kurt, J. "ngersol, and =2nn =le'ell2n 48ds7. 199*. 3ethods o; !ocial Anal2sis in De&eloping Countries,. Boulder, C#$ %est&ie' (ress. =eistrit@, =arr2 and !te&en H. 3urdocA. 1981. The "mpact o; /esource De&elopment$ 3ethods o; Assessment, Boulder, C#$ %est&ie' (ress, "!B) *+891-8+9.8+3. /icAson, /o2 8., Tor Hundloe, eo;;re2 T. 3cDonold and /a0el J. Brudge, 48ds.7 199*. :!ocial "mpact o; De&elopment$ (utting Theor2 and 3ethods into (ractice: 8n&ironmental "mpact Assessment /e&ie', 1*$ 1 E 6F 3-. pages. !to;;le, /ichard %., and others, 199*, :Calculating the Cultural !igni;icance o; American "ndian (lants$ (aiute and !hoshone 8thno0otan2 at Bucca 3ountain )e&eda:, American anthropologist, 96467, pp 11,+136. #esearch %indings 8lAind+!a&atsA2, (amela. 198,. Di;;erential !ocial "mpacts o; /ural /esource De&elopment, Boulder, C#$ %est&ie' (ress, 693 pp. 9inster0usch, Kurt. 198*. >nderstanding !ocial "mpacts$ Assessing the 8;;ects o; (u0lic (roGects. Be&erl2 Hills, CA$ !age. 9reuden0urg, %illiam /. and /o0ert ramling. 1996. :Communit2 "mpacts o; Technological Change$ To'ard a =ongitudinal (erspecti&e.: !ocial 9orces 93.+--.

.*417$

9reuden0urg, %illiam /. and /o0ert 8. Jones. 1996. :Criminal Beha&ior and /apid Communit2 ro'th$ 85amining the 8&idence.: /ural !ociolog2 -,417$ ,19+1-. ramling, /o0ert and %illiam /. 9reuden0urg. 199*. :A Closer =ooA at C=ocal ControlC$ Communities, Commodities, and the Collapse o; the Coast.: /ural !ociolog2 --417$ -11+-8. reider, Thomas and =arraine arAo&ich. 1991. :!2m0olic =andscapes$ The !ocial Construction o; )ature and the 8n&ironment.: /ural !oiciolog2 -9467$ ;orthcoming.

ulli;ord, Andre'. 1989. Boomto'n Blues$ Colorado #il !hale, 188-+198-. )i'ot, C#$ >ni&ersit2 (ress o; Colorado. =le'ell2n, =. . 1981. :The !ocial Cost o; >r0an Transportation.: "n ". Altman, J. %ohl'ill and (. 8&erett 4eds.7, Transportation and Beha&ior, )e' BorA$ (lenum (ress, 1,9+6*6. !to;;le, /ichard %. and others, 1991, :/isA (erception 3apping$ >sing 8thnograph2 to De;ine the =ocall2 A;;ected (opulation ;or a =o'+=e&el /adioacti&e %aste !torage 9acilit2 in 3ichigan:, American Anthropologist, 93 437$ ,111+,3-. &iterature #e$ie's Bo'les, /o2 T. 1981. !ocial "mpact Assessment in !mall CommunitiesF An integrati&e /e&ie' o; !elected =iterature. Toronto$ Butter'orths, "!B) *+1*9+81,11+,. Carle2, 3ichael J. 1981. !ocial "mpact Assessment$ A Cross+Disciplinar2 uide to =iterature. Boulder, C#$ %est&ie' (ress, "!B) *+8,-31+-69+9 =eistrit@, =arr2 and Brenda 8Astrom, 198,. !ocial "mpact Assessment and 3anagement$ An Annotated Bi0liograph2, )e' BorA$ arland. Conceptual Guidelines Brudge, /a0el J. 1991. A Conceptual Approach to !ocial "mpact Assessment$ An 8dited Compilation o; the 'riting o; /a0el J. Brudge and Colleagues, 3iddleton, %" 4(.#. Bo5 ,6*8,37$ !ocial 8colog2 (ress, 66, pages. 9reuden0urg, %illiam /. and Kenneth 3. Keating. 198-, :Appl2ing !ociolog2 to (olic2$ !ocial !ciences and the 8n&ironmental "mpact !tatement: /ural !ociolog2 -*417$-.8+,*-. ramling, /o0ert and %illiam /. 9reuden0urg. 1996, :#pportunit2+Threat, De&elopment, and Adaptation$ To'ard a Comprehensi&e 9rame'orA ;or !ocial "mpact Assessment,$ /ural !ociolog2, -., 467$ 61,+631. 199*. /icAson, /o2 8., /a0el J. Brudge and Audre2 Armour 48ds.7. :"ntegrating "mpact Assessment into the (lanning (rocess$

"nternational (erspecti&es and 85periences,: "mpact Assessment Bulletin, 8$ 1 E 6F 3-. pages. Peer(#e$ie'ed )ournals American Anthropologist 8n&ironmental "mpact Assessment /e&ie' Human #rgani@ation "mpact Assessment 4;ormerl2 "mpact Assessment Bulletin7 (roGect Appraisal /ural !ociolog2 !ociet2 and )atural /esources Professional Associations International Association for Impact Assessment *IAIA+, 'as organi@ed in 198* to 0ring together researchers, go&ernment emplo2ees, practitioners, and users o; all t2pes o; impact assessment. %rite "A"A, (.#.Bo5 .*, Belha&en, )C 6.81*. Ac"no'ledgements As mem0ers o; the Committee 'e could not ha&e produced this monograph alone. %e 'ant to thanA the ;ollo'ing indi&iduals ;or their e;;orts and contri0utions to the completion o; this document$ Kath2 /ee&es, "nstitute ;or 8n&ironmental !tudies, >ni&ersit2 o; "llinois at >r0anna+Champaign, ;or t2ping all the dra;tsF Kath2 Bo'man, (ortland, #regon ;or editingF Christine Holdgen raphic Design ;or contri0uting document design and desAtop pu0lishingF and Arnold Holden ;or technical eidting and assuring consistenc2 'ith ;ederal regulations.