Human rights and impact assessment: clarifying the connections in practice

Human rights, Indigenous peoples and the concept of Free, Prior and Informed Consent

“…Because of potential future litigation (refer to the examples of human rights abuse in Kemp & Vanclay 2013), an issue for companies will be to ensure that they can establish into the future that FPIC was observed and fully applied. Although the mere existence of an IBA is not proof of FPIC (as discussed above), where IBAs are carefully written and document all the relevant details, it is likely that an IBA can establish that FPIC was observed.…”

Social impact assessment in the Russian Federation: does it meet the key values of democracy and civil society?

“…Along with civil society and democracy, SIA is inherently participatory (Lockie 2001;Esteves et al 2012). It acknowledges the right of people to self-determination (Hanna and Vanclay 2013) and builds on certain key principles and values (Vanclay 2003), including respect for human rights (Vanclay 2003;Kemp and Vanclay 2013;Gӧtzmann et al 2016;Esteves et al 2017). Vanclay (2012) asserted that the understandings, experiences, philosophy and methods of SIA greatly enhance democratic decision-making and planning processes.…”

Social impact assessment and ethical research principles: ethical professional practice in impact assessment Part II

“…A further issue is that some reports cite the International Principles for the purposes of legitimation, but follow few of the methodological or substantive principles it advocates. In some jurisdictions, lack of consideration of human rights (Kemp & Vanclay 2013) or free, prior and informed consent (Hanna & Vanclay 2013) would also be markers of poor performance.…”