Download
1 / 38
380 likes | 502 Views
SIA definition. SIA can be defined as the process of assessing and estimating, in advance, the social consequences that are likely to follow from specific policy actions or project development, particularly in the context of appropriate policy legislation.
E N D
SIA definition • SIA can be defined as the process of assessing and estimating, in advance, the social consequences that are likely to follow from specific policy actions or project development, particularly in the context of appropriate policy legislation. • SIA normally undertaken within the relevant national environmental policy framework • Recommended for any project that will ultimately cause social change Examples: The social impact of tourism, of mining, oil exploration, development studies, new health care programs, dams, nuclear power and new road (highway) construction
What are the likely social consequences • SOCIAL IMPACTS Include all social and cultural consequences to human population of any public/private action that alters people’s lives. • CULTURAL IMPACTS Involve changes to norms, values beliefs
10 steps in SIA process • Public involvement • Identification of alternatives • Profile baseline conditions • Scoping • Projection of estimated effects • Prediction of responses to impacts • Estimate indirect and cumulative impacts • Changes in alternatives • Mitigation • Monitoring
Methodology (1) • SIA develops concepts and methodologies that may be used to understand likely social changes before events occurs • SIA anticipatory in nature • Uses data and methodologies in an ex-ante basis
Methodology (2) • Population change • Community and institutional structures • Political and social resources • Individual and family changes • Community resources • Attitudes, beliefs and values • Social organization • Indicators of individual and community well-being
Methodology (3) - VARIABLES • Relocated populations • Size and structure of local government • Historical experience with change • Distribution of power and authority • Identification of stakeholders • Perception of risk • Health and safety • Attitudes toward project/policy • Change in country infrastructure
ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES Reduces stress that results from uncertainty It is almost impossible to catalog the true dimensions of social impacts
Benefits (1) • SIA that involve the community minimize local resistance to projects • SIA increases project success • SIA prevents major planning disasters and associated costs • SIA may well save money IN THE LONG RUN!!!!
Benefits (2) • The cost of SIA as the cost of the project • It is important to prevent the majority of impacts before they happen!!!
Difficulties 1- Difficulties in applying the social sciences in SIA 2- Difficulties with SiA Process itself 3- Problems with the procedures applying to SIA 4- The asocietal mentality
FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES IN SIA • Who have legitimate interests in the community? • How is the ‘affected community’ to be defined and identified? • What should be the role of the community participation in SIA? • What impacts are to be considered? • Who judges?
PRINCIPLES FOR SIA (1) • Involve the diverse public • Analyze impact equity • Focus the assessment • Identify methods and assumptions 5. Define significance in advance
FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES IN SIA (2) • Provide feedback on social impacts to project planners 2. Use SIA practitioners!!! 3. Establish monitoring and mitigation programs 4. Identify data sources 5. Plan for gaps in data
WHY MOVING IA TO THE POLICY LEVEL? • Involve more government and public actors in assessment of key decisions • Increase assessment efficiency by applying it to one macro policy rather than many individual projects • Widening the range of options assessed • Improving assessment of cumulative, synergistic and secondary impacts.
PA versus PIA • Policy is to be seen as a general prescription for guiding decision making which can be very broad or narrow, explicit or implicit, with layers of policy forming a complex ends-means hierarchy.
PA versus PIA (2) PIA becomes a component of PA: PIA is the application of IA that bridges to PE; PA is the attempted integration of PIA with PE.
WHY THEN CHOOSING PA? • The need for the conception of a process that comprehensively assesses outcomes • The need for the conception of a process that comprehensively assesses fundamental policies • The need for the conception of an assessment process that is both integrated with policy design and scrutinizes policy design
DEFINITION OF PA • The process by which fundamental policy options are continuously identified and assessed in terms of all highest level societal goals.
OBJECTIONS TO FORMAL HEURISTIC POLICY ASSESSMENT (1) • Ultimately policy is about beliefs. We cannot resolve fundamental paradigmatic issues • Answer: Beliefs change on the basis of new information and careful logic, both of which would be fostered by Formal Heuristic PA.
OBJECTIONS TO FORMAL HEURISTIC POLICY ASSESSMENT (2) • People avoid fundamental issues. They fear conflict, thinking difficulty, or difficult conclusions. • Answer: Procedural mechanisms and guidelines can encourage assessment processes that are fun, satisfying and redemptive
OBJECTIONS TO FORMAL HEURISTIC POLICY ASSESSMENT (3) • Policy is made continuously and fluidly by many decision-centers: to formalize PA is to ossify it. • Answer: Formalization could enliven PA by increasing the variety of opportunities for initiating, applying and conducting PA
OBJECTIONS TO FORMAL HEURISTIC POLICY ASSESSMENT (4) • Formal PA is too slow. We need quick processes to urgent issues, not more public consultation. • Answer: FHPA may slow some decisions but speed up the initiation and resolution of others. In any event it is better to make a good decision slowly than a bad one quickly.
