Guide To Social Impact Assessment

A Framework For Assessing Social Change

Kristi Branch

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9780429716355
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Economics
• Subtopic: Sustainable Development
• Index: Economics

Designed to provide clear and detailed assistance in the complex process of assessing social change, this book emphasizes the development of an analytic approach and a theoretical framework that can be applied to the assessment of very diverse events--changes in the natural environment, the local economy, or the dominant technology. The guide, based on a sociological perspective that highlights the importance of community social organization in analyzing social change, focuses on the development of user skills in assessment design, research, analysis, and presentation. The guide's theoretical basis and emphasis on the interrelationships that create social change make it valuable to those studying social change in general, as well as to those responsible for conducting or utilizing social impact assessments. Detailed "how to" information, clear writing, and careful design impart the skills necessary to identify and analyze the factors and processes leading to social change and to interpret and present research findings in an effective manner.

Section II:
A Framework for Social Assessment

5. Defining the Context of the Assessment

5.1 Introduction

Although the overall assessment process described in Chapter 3 has become relatively well established in environmental impact assessments, assessments vary greatly in their purpose and in the way they are organized. Before starting the actual assessment effort, it is important to take some time to make sure that you understand the particular assessment you are to work on, including: (1) why the assessment is being conducted and how it fits into the organization responsible for doing the assessment; (2) what types of decisions are to be made, by whom, and when; (3) the procedures that are to be followed, since these determine how the work is to be done, what the individual responsibilities are, and how the results are to be presented; and (4) the relationships and organizational links between the assessment team, the assessment team leaders, the decision makers, the project sponsors, and the interested public. These relationships define many aspects of your job, and it is often up to you to determine what they are and how they can be used.

This chapter discusses the questions about purpose, organization, and procedures that should be answered before you begin the assessment effort. You may already have many of the answers, either from previous experience or from previous organizational information and meetings. Nevertheless, reviewing the topics presented in this chapter before starting the assessment will help you organize this information and ensure that no recent changes have been made that will affect the design and implementation of your work.

The procedure recommended in this chapter has three benefits. First, it helps ensure that no important organizational questions that could lead you to make poor assessment or organizational decisions go unanswered. Second, it prompts you to think through the assessment process from the perspective of the organization and the decision makers responsible for the assessment. This improves your ability to focus the assessment and the presentation of results. Third, it provides an outline of the information that should be made available to the assessment team and reviewed with them before the technical assessment effort begins. This can be especially helpful to those who are responsible for directing the assessment effort or supervising other workers.

Two general topics are covered in this chapter:

• 1) The decision-making context, or what the assessment is to do and when
• 2) The procedural context, or how the work is to be done and the results are to be presented

5.2 The Decision-Making Context

In order to plan a responsive and effective social assessment, it is important to understand the organizational and decision-making context in which the assessment is to occur. A good starting point is to define the objectives of the proposed action and the purpose and scope of the assessment.

Define the Assessment Task

Assessment information is used to inform a wide variety of decisions. To determine what type of assessment effort is appropriate, the overall purpose of the proposed action and of the assessment and planning or decision-making process to which it applies must be understood. In some cases, the purposes are clearly specified. In others, they may not yet have been clearly defined and still require additional evaluation and discussion. Frequently, assessments are expected to serve multiple purposes, so it is important to make sure that all the objectives for the assessment are clear.

In this stage of the assessment it is useful to clarify the principal objectives of the proposed action. The objectives of the assessment and the interests of the decision makers will be quite different if the primary purpose of the project, for example, is to generate an economic return for the project sponsor than if its primary purpose is to promote social change. For projects with a primary economic or environmental protection motivation, the greatest concern is likely to be demonstration that the project will not cause significant social change. (Examples of these types of projects include coal mining, power plant development, and nuclear waste disposal). Conversely, for projects whose primary motivation is social change (for example urban renewal, VISTA) and/or economic development, the greatest concern is likely to be demonstration that the desired social change will actually occur.

If care is not taken, these differences in focus can bias the conclusions of the assessment by consistently placing the burden of proof on one side or the other of the social change analysis. Consequently, although it is important to focus the assessment on the questions pertinent to the decision makers, it is also important to guard against this bias throughout the analytic process and to be aware of the consequences of stating the questions in a particular way.

Another aspect that greatly influences the purpose and design of an assessment (as well as the assessment team's role within its organization) is the relationship between the organization conducting the assessment and the organization(s) that would implement the actions being assessed. Four types of relationships are common. Each has characteristics which have implications for the type of analysis that is feasible or appropriate and for the type of information that is needed from the assessment by the decision makers. Each is described briefly below:

• 1) The organization conducting the assessment has design and scheduling (including cancellation) authority over the proposed action. In these cases, the assessment is usually part of an internal decision-making process for the design and evaluation of projects that the organization itself will implement. Examples of this type of relationship within federal agencies include the assessment of a management framework or resource management plan by the Bureau of Land Management and the assessment of a weapons deployment project by the Department of Defense. Examples within the private sector include a corporate assessment of the development alternatives for their real estate or mineral holdings or the relocation of corporate headquarters.
  These assessments often provide the greatest opportunity for the assessors to work closely with the decision makers from the formulation of alternatives through to the design of implementation plans and monitoring programs because the organization conducting the assessment controls the important project design decisions. Detailed information about the proposed alternatives is likely to be available, and decision makers are likely to be interested in specific and detailed analyses.
• 2) The organization conducting the assessment has authority to make resource management or policy decisions that could lead to (or prevent) multiple, presently unspecified actions by other organizations. Examples of this type of assessment include (1) the evaluation of leasing decisions for minerals, timber, or grassland (for example) where the decision to lease is a prerequisite for resource development projects and (2) the evaluation of policies establishing the criteria for hazardous waste disposal siting.
  These assessments frequently involve comparison of numerous alternatives about which only limited information is available. Because of the indirect relationship between the organization conducting the assessment and the project implementors (who are often not specified at the time of the assessment), project characteristics are frequently sketchy and information about implementation plans and implementor-community relationships is often lacking. The focus of these assessments is typically on delineating the range of impacts that could result from each of the decision alternatives. This type of assessment often has many similarities to the formulation of alternatives process discussed inChapter 7.
• 3) The organization conducting the assessment has regulatory authority or approval power over an action proposed, designed, and to be implemented by another organization. Examples include (1) federal or state agencies assessing a
• permit application for a major facility over which they have jurisdiction (coal mines, for example) and (2) private corporations assessing a project being proposed by a subsidiary.
  In these assessments, detailed information about the proposed action should be available, but it may be difficult to obtain (since it has not been developed by the organization conducting the assessment) and may be subject to unanticipated revisions that can affect the assessment process. The assessment team is likely to have minimal participation in the formulation of alternatives, and an arms length, potentially adversarial relationship with the project implementor in preparing decisions and making implementation and monitoring recommendations.
• 4) The organization conducting the assessment has no direct authority over the proposed action, but wishes to evaluate it. Examples include (1) interest groups wishing to assure themselves about the validity of the assessment results and/or to provide a basis for political action and (2) assessments conducted by social scientists as part of applied research on social change (for example, a natural disaster, technological innovation, etc.)
  In these cases, information concerning the proposed action may be difficult to obtain, either because it has been developed by another organization which has little incentive to release it or because no information has been developed. The latter often occurs when the assessment is addressing an event that does not have a single specified sponsor--for example a technological innovation.

Realistic evaluation of the purposes of the assessment from the perspective of the organization conducting it is the first step in planning an effective assessment. It may well raise strategic questions about the organization of the assessment effort and the assessment's role in the decision-making process.

In many cases, the particular assessment being undertaken is part of a decision-making and planning process that involves a series of interrelated assessment and decision-making steps. In order to proceed efficiently, it is important to determine what has already been done, and what will be done following the current assessment. An important part of this task is to determine what decisions have already been made and what information has already been collected and presented to the decision makers. This information serves several functions: (1) it prevents wasting effort on alternatives or decisions that have been discarded or already addressed, (2) it provides useful evidence about the type of information that has already been gathered and about how the information was used by the decision maker, and (3) it helps to further delineate the purpose and scope of the assessment as well as the range of alternatives to be evaluated.

Sometimes you will need to obtain and review the work conducted for social assessments that occurred earlier in the decision sequence. Usually, you will review information obtained from other aspects of the planning and decision-making process. At this stage, it is not necessary to review this material in detail, but merely to determine what is available and scan it for a general understanding of its contents.

Understanding how the current assessment effort fits into the overall decision-making process requires looking forward as well as back. The purpose of the assessment, and hence the appropriate level of detail and analysis, are affected by the effort's position in the overall decision-making process. Consequently, it is important to establish the expectations for this assessment and to keep in mind that not everything that should be addressed must be covered at the same level of detail in each assessment.

Determine How the Overall Assessment Effort Is Organized

Once the overall purpose of the assessment effort and its relationship to the actions/decisions of the various organizations involved have been defined, the next step is to determine how the assessment effort is to be organized and how it fits into the overall structure of the organization. Some common arrangements include the following:

• 1) Formation of a special assessment team. For some assessments, special teams are formed that have a particular structure and relationship to the organization. In this case, it is important to include the team leader among the decision makers whose schedule and objectives should be understood.
• 2) Utilization of staff in their normal positions. In some cases, no special team is formed, and the assessment is conducted by staff members as part of their normal assignments.
• 3) Supervision of a third party. In still other cases, the actual assessment is conducted by another organization (e.g., a contractor), although responsibility for supervision and/or review is maintained by the sponsoring agency.

Whatever the arrangement, it is important that the organization of the overall assessment effort and its relationship to the decision makers be clearly understood. This requires that the following points be clarified:

• 1) Authority structure. Who is responsible and authorized to do what?
• 2) Decision-making structure. Who will be making which decisions regarding the proposed alternatives and the assessment effort?
• 3) Information flow/communications. How is information to be obtained and disseminated? Who will have access to what information and when? What other organizations are involved? How are these relationships structured?

Because these arrangements vary so greatly, no effort is made here to describe all the alternatives that might be encountered. However, it should be noted that assessments are often conducted in short time frames and are subject to intense public scrutiny, political pressure, and frequent changes in organization and procedures. It is your responsibility to ask those questions that will enable you to perform your work efficiently and with as little organizational friction as possible. It is important to remember that your ability to "read" the organization, to figure out how things work, and to work within the structure will often be interpreted as an indication of both your ability to understand the communities in the impacted area and your skill in obtaining information about organizational and interpersonal relationships in a diplomatic and efficient manner. Consequently, it pays substantial dividends to attend to this problem and to approach the definition of the assessment's organizational context with care and tact.

It cannot be emphasized enough that the assessment process is inherently political. Numerous factors representing a variety of perspectives and vested interests will be interested in, and trying to influence the assessment and the decision-making process. In order to perform a valid, professional assessment while protecting one's organization, the social assessor cannot afford to be naive about the political nature of the assessment process. This certainly does not mean that the scientific integrity of the assessment should be compromised, but that the political contest must be analyzed and skillfully addressed. For some helpful discussions of this feature of assessment work, see:

Weiss, Carol 1975 Evaluation Research in the Political Context. In Handbook of Evaluation Research, Vol 1. E.L. Struening and M. Guttentag, eds., pp 13-26. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.

Stufflebeam, Daniel L. and William Webster 1981 An Analysis of Alternative Approaches to Evaluation. In Evaluation Studies Annual Review, Vol 6. H.E. Freeman and M.A. Soloman, eds., pp 70-85. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.

Identify the Decision-Making Criteria

An underlyin...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Other Titles In This Series
• Social Impact Assessment Series
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Figures
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• SECTION I: GENERAL PRINCIPLES
• SECTION II: A FRAMEWORK FOR SOCIAL ASSESSMENT
• SECTION III: METHODS AND TECHNIQUES
• APPENDIXES
• Index