China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Social impact assessment for sponge city PPPs: Framework and indicators
Published in Konstantinos Papadikis, Chee S. Chin, Isaac Galobardes, Guobin Gong, Fangyu Guo, Sustainable Buildings and Structures: Building a Sustainable Tomorrow, 2019
Social impact assessment has always been considered to be a valid way to improve efficiency of infrastructure projects and avoid possible risks or failure, as it would help the decision maker develop specific project management measures based on the advanced analysis of social impacts. Especially for sponge city PPPs, as an innovative project involved in varieties of infrastructure renovation and construction projects, its social impacts characterized by wide geographical area and complex affected populations. Therefore, scientific social impact assessment could play an important role in reducing negative impacts and implement project goals more effectively. Although there are some deficiency using indicator to evaluate the complicated and dynamic social impact (Arce-Gomez et al. 2015), they still were an widely-used tools that could be useful and intelligible for public policymaker as their focus and multi-dimensions on special issues (Padilla-Rivera et al. 2016).
Using social impact assessment to achieve better outcomes for communities and mining companies
Published in Sumit K. Lodhia, Mining and Sustainable Development, 2018
Susan Joyce, Rauno Sairinen, Frank Vanclay
Social impact assessment is the process of using professional expertise to combine a rigorous evidence base with qualitative assessment, with the aim of managing the social issues and impacts of projects in a participatory way, thus providing improved outcomes for communities and companies alike. In the mining sector, this means that SIA has an expanded role of research, engagement, action and monitoring through the full mine life-cycle from early exploration through to closure. SIAs, and EIAs for that matter, are not carried out only for compliance with regulatory requirements, or as a check-box approach to fulfilling international standards or corporate policies – they are done to achieve improved outcomes. This wider application of SIA as a management process has been an important and influential development during last decade with particularly strong uptake in the mining sector.
Water Resources Systems Management for Sustainable
Published in Slobodan P. Simonović, Managing Water Resources, 2012
Societal values and norms are shifting from a position of favouring ‘unchecked’ economic growth to one of concern for the environment and well-being of people. Social impact assessments have become an integral part of the water resources decision-making process. The success of large developments often depends on an effective balance of local costs and distributed benefits. Social assessments are useful in suggesting appropriate trade-offs between these costs and benefits. Each development is an intervention into a social system. The baseline social conditions are a dynamic system of interactions. Technology can be applied to increase the resilience of the social system or to mitigate the effects of natural events on that system. Social impact assessment assists the decision-making process in developing the profile of this dynamic system, projecting future states with and without the development, and identifying and evaluating the impacts.
Social license and synthetic biology: the trouble with mining terms
Published in Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2020
Jason A. Delborne, Adam E. Kokotovich, Jeantine E. Lunshof
To quantify the overall rise in use of SLO (often abbreviated as ‘social license’), Gehman, Lefsrud, and Fast (2017) found that while news media mentioned ‘social license’ under ten times a year from 1997 until 2002, the frequency rose to over two-thousand times in 2016. One might interpret this trend as evidence of increasing acknowledgement of the power of the social – that decisions about research and development do not rest only in the hands of companies, scientists, and formal regulators, but also with communities. Indeed, the ‘social’ in SLO resonates with Social Impact Assessment, defined as ‘the process of identifying and managing the social issues of project development, and includes the effective engagement of affected communities in participatory processes of identification, assessment and management of social impacts’ (Vanclay et al. 2015, iv). Vanclay et al. (2015) point out that Social Impact Assessment is tightly connected with Environmental Impact Assessment, both of which emerged in the 1970s with rising concerns about social and environmental impacts of industrial and technological development.
Embedding social inclusiveness and appropriateness in engineering assessment of green infrastructure to enhance urban resilience
Published in Urban Water Journal, 2019
Sarah Ward, Chad Staddon, Laura De Vito, Adriana Zuniga-Teran, Andrea K. Gerlak, Yolandi Schoeman, Aimee Hart, Giles Booth
This review paper proceeds as follows. Firstly, we review the past domination of monetisation in grey but then green infrastructure engineering assessments. Then, we move to review the present focus on ‘greening’ coverage of environmental dimensions within both grey and green infrastructure engineering assessments. Finally, we consider the future of diversified (rather than just hybrid) engineering assessments (hybrid = two components; diversified = more than two components) by suggesting and reviewing some approaches to include social assessment. Hybridisation is important as the more diversified is an assessment, the greater the potential for reducing uncertainties in the assessment of resilience and sustainability. In turn, this may mean greater confidence for stakeholders in ensuring they go further to be inclusive of and appropriate to all aspects, as far as is currently possible. We suggest that tools such as social impact assessment have their place alongside their economic and environmental counterparts, which is essential for achieving amongst other things the SDGs. In our conclusion, we reiterate the main themes of discussion. In terms of methodological approach, this comprised a thorough review of the relevant literature and a meta-analysis of 10 extensive multiple organisation resilience engineering agenda setting scoping studies completed through The Resilience Shift coordinated by Arup funded through the Lloyd’s Register Foundation’s Resilience Engineering initiative. Through this meta-analysis, we were able to uncover the central tendencies in how the engineering community worldwide is thinking about and approaching resilience. The authors were responsible for one of the scoping studies, as well as a portfolio of case studies on GI and urban resilience, as part of the initiative.