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

Abstract

This paper considers a range of ethical issues in social impact assessment (SIA) providing a commentary from a professional practice perspective. Drawing on its companion paper Principles for ethical research involving humans: Ethical professional practice in impact assessment Part I. Impact Assess Proj Appraisal, 31(4):243 -253), the 18 principles of ethical research are discussed as they pertain to SIA practice. While the ethical principles are highly relevant and align well with good practice SIA, there will be situations where the specific requirements suggested by the principles need to be carefully thought through by practitioners. Although making some general conclusions, the paper's main purpose is to stimulate further debate about ethical issues within the impact assessment profession. Key recommendations that emerge for SIA practice include the need for SIA practitioners to use information sheets routinely, and to increase the use of signed consent forms. It is also recommended that the International Association for Impact Assessment provide a service to allow practitioners to gain ethical approval for their projects in non-routine cases.

How a large project was halted by the lack of a social Licence to operate: Testing the applicability of the Thomson and Boutilier model

“…The interviews clarified and/or validated the information which had been collected from project documents and the internet. Consistent with SIA methodology (Baines et al, 2013), given the conflict context of this particular project, it was not appropriate to record interviews, and therefore extensive notes were taken (in Georgian language) during the interviews. We used a narrative analysis approach (Ezzy, 2002) for analysing the data.…”

The importance of cultural aspects in impact assessment and project development: reflections from a case study of a hydroelectric dam in Brazil

“…To analyse the performance of the PROCAMBIX compensation program, we give particular attention to Indigenous perceptions of the impacts of the dam and the mitigation measures. This is supported by a description of the broader socio-political context in which the compensation project was designed and implemented -aspects that are not usually considered in impact assessment (O'Faircheallaigh 2011;Baines et al 2013). This paper considers both the social and environmental impacts because, especially in an Indigenous context, they are highly integrated (Slootweg et al 2001;Vanclay 2002).…”

Socially-Tolerated Practices in Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Reporting: Discourses, Displacement, and Impoverishment

“…Ideological Underpinning -12) Resistance to hardship Ubuntu PPL2 (13)(14) Endurance Economic prosperity for the 'atonement of blood' Mining Charter (15)(16)(17) Tolerance Affirmative action…”

“…The entrenchment of identity perspectives of corporate social responsibility (CSR) into ESIA thinking can, therefore, encourage critical reflexive practices in impact assessment. CSR [1], ethical professional practice [15,16], and a human rights based approach [17] are at the forefront of strategic deliberations on project-induced displacement and resettlement. Inherent in the routine application of environmental regulations [10], organisational relations (e.g., project proponents and ESIA practitioners), and social relations (affected communities, civil society and government) are contradictions [11] that perpetuate project-induced displacement and impoverishment.…”