Ilse Aucamp
Ptersa Environmental Management Consultants
Tel: 082 828 0668
E-mail: ilsea@lantic.net
© Ptersa
What is social impact assessment?
© Ptersa
The official definition:
Social Impact Assessment includes the process of
analysing, monitoring and managing the intended and
unintended social consequences, both positive and
negative, of planned interventions (policies,
programmes, plans, projects) and any social change
processes invoked by these interventions. Its primary
purpose is to bring a more sustainable and equitable
biophysical and human environment.
- IAIA (2003)
© Ptersa
The reality?
“Guerrilla warfare is used by
the side which is supported
by a majority but which
possesses a much smaller
number of arms for use in
defense against oppression”
General principles of Guerilla Warfare by Che
Guevara
© Ptersa
How does it work? (worst case)
 Environmental
consultant decides an
SIA is needed.
 Usually after scoping
phase.
 Give very short time to
conduct SIA.
 Proponent insists project
is in the best interest of
the community….
© Ptersa
SIA consultant enters the
community…
•Community often angry
•Usually only short term
intervention – limited
contact
•SIA person has no
decision-making power
•Inconsistent messages
from different people
•Who can we talk to?
© Ptersa
Next steps….
© Ptersa
Typical social issues
Employment
Who pays the price,
and who gets the
benefit?
Migration
© Ptersa
Bio-physical
resources
Infrastructure
Poverty gap
What goes wrong?
Wrong
information
Focus only on
economics
Angry, over-consulted
communities
© Ptersa
Lack
“Quick”
consultation
of information
Bad communication
Lack of sustainable mitigation
What is the result?
Vulnerable communities exposed
Poverty
Impact on livelihoods
No social licence to operate
© Ptersa
Access to resources
Social instability
What should it be like?
Partnerships
Integration of all aspects
Strategic
© Ptersa
All inclusive
Long term sustainability
Contribute to social development
How can we get there?
Links between different levels
YOU
must be a change agent!
Working together
Sharing & support
© Ptersa
The road ahead…
© Ptersa
© Ptersa
14
Historical overview – South Africa
 The history of SIA in South Africa is not documented.
 EIA has been undertaken in South Africa since the
1970’s, especially for big and controversial projects, and
have been legislated since 1989 in terms of the
Environment Conservation Act - now NEMA.
 NEMA gives a clear mandate for including the social
environment in the EIA process
© Ptersa
15
Historical overview – South
Africa(2)
 Currently 2 guidelines in SA
 Socio-Economic Impact Assessment, Integrated
Environmental Management Information Series 22
 Guideline for involving Social Assessment Specialists in
EIA processes (Western Cape)
 Relies heavily on international literature
© Ptersa
16
Significant developments in the
field
 Development planning in multi-lateral agencies such
as the World Bank, Food and Agriculture Organisation
(FAO) and Asian Development Bank started to require
social impact assessment for their projects.
 All produced detailed procedures and manuals for
Social Impact Assessment in the 1990’s.
 Social assessments are now standard requirements for
their projects
© Ptersa
17
Benchmarking publications
 Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact
Assessment
 Interorganizational Committee for Guidelines and
Principles for Social Impact Assessment
 International Principles and Guidelines for Social
Impact Assessment –
 International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA)
© Ptersa
18
© Ptersa
19
Why SIA is “enforced”
 Regulatory requirements
 Finance/insurance
 Pragmatic response – companies learned from
previous mistakes - failure to understand lead to real
problems
 Attempt to apply Sustainable Development
policies/guidelines
© Ptersa
20
Legislation on the Social
Environment
 The Constitution
 National Environmental Management Act
 Mineral & Petroleum Resources




Development Act
National Heritage Resources Act
National Water Act
Development Facilitation Act
White Paper on Social Development
© Ptersa
The Mineral and Petroleum
Resources Development Act (No.
28 of 2002)
 Only environmental act that explicitly requires a social
development output.
 Preamble to the Act recognises need to promote local
and rural development and the social upliftment of
communities affected by mining.
© Ptersa
22
MPRDA continue
 Section 39 explicitly requires a SIA as well as an EIA
when it states that applicants must:
 “…investigate, assess and evaluate the impact of his or
her proposed prospecting or mining operations on:


(i) the environment;
(ii) the socio-economic conditions of any person who might
be directly affected by the prospecting or mining operation…”
© Ptersa
23
Sections 40 to 46, Chapter 2, Part II
– Social and Labour Plan
 Social and Labour Plan requires applicants for mining
and production rights to develop and implement
comprehensive:
 Human Resources Development Programmes;
 Employment Equity Plans;
 Local Economic Development Programmes; and
 Processes to save jobs and manage downscaling and/or
closure.
© Ptersa
24
Other legislation
 Legislation applicable depends on context of the SIA
e.g. The Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Labour
Relations Act etc.
 Other processes e.g. Local Agenda 21, Integrated
Development Plans etc.
 International commitments e.g. Millennium
Development Goals
© Ptersa
25
© Ptersa
26
Social licence to operate
 “…the acceptance and belief by society, and specifically
local communities, in the value creation of activities.
Social licence cannot be obtained by going to a
government department and making an application or
simply paying a fee. It requires far more than money to
truly become part of the communities in which a
company operate.
 The degree of match between stakeholders’ individual
expectations of corporate behaviour and companies’
actual behaviour.
© Ptersa
27
Social Licence to operate (2)
 Social License minimizes project risk:
 “Successful operations require the support of the
communities in which they operate now, and in the
future, to ensure continued access to land and
resources”
© Ptersa
28
Coca Cola remarks:
 “Regulatory licences to water is not enough” says Jeff
Seabright of Coca Cola. “We need a social license – the
OK of the community – to operate.
 The Economist , August 23rd 2008
© Ptersa
29
Benefits to business
 Risk management tool
 Managing the short and long-term social impacts.
 Providing important input into the design of effective
stakeholder engagement, building consensus and
collaboration between parties and managing expectations.
 This can assist in securing trust with:
 The workforce, helping to prevent disputes.
 The local communities, to avoid protests, blockades and land
access disputes.
 The regulatory authorities, reducing problems such as
licensing delays.
© Ptersa
30
Benefits to business (2)
 Better estimating and optimisation of socio-economic
costs (like resettlement), resources required for
mitigation measures, management plans, etc.
 Defining socio-economic considerations for inclusion
into tender documents.
 Meeting the requirements of financial and aid
institutions which may be important to the company
or one of its partners.
© Ptersa
31
Benefits to communities
 Access to the company to express their views/ concerns
and suggestions and involvement in the decisionmaking processes as a result of effective consultation.
 Identification of opportunities for economic
development through the supply of goods and services
by local stakeholders.
 Contribution to local capacity building in
infrastructure, services and environmental protection.
 Increase in human capacity building through the
transfer of best practices.
© Ptersa
32
Benefits to the communities (2)
 Social investment to meet both local and project
needs.
 Support for traditional industries alongside the
development of the project.
 Protection of cultural resources for the communities.
 Inclusion for local communities through better
understanding of both the positive and negative
effects of the project or operation
© Ptersa
33
© Ptersa
© Ptersa
Approaches to SIA
 Technical approach
 Scientist remains a neutral observer of social
phenomena. Role of scientist is to identify indicators,
obtain objective measures relevant to the situation and
provide expert assessment on how system will change
 Participatory approach
 Uses the knowledge and experiences of individuals
most affected by the proposed changes as the basis for
projecting impacts. Role of scientist is facilitator of
knowledge sharing, interpretation and reporting of
impacts
© Ptersa
Steps in the SIA process
 SIA is an iterative (repetitive) process
 It is not a linear process
 Can be seen as a “navigation” process – adaptations
can be made during the process to keep the “ship” on
course
 The approach or orientation you use can influence the
process.
 Not set in stone
© Ptersa
SIA process - Design Phase
Element of process
Information gathering
Typical activity
PP process
Field work
Desktop study
Scoping
Identify preliminary issues
Define study area for
assessment – timing, depth
and extent needed
Baseline study
Study and analyse
demographic data
Create context for SIA
Assessment of impacts
Analyse, describe and
assess impacts
Integrate with other
specialists
© Ptersa
SIA process - Implementation Phase
Element of process
Typical activity
Mitigation
Suggest mitigation
measures – practical,
implementable, affordable
Integrate with other
specialist
Social Management Plan
Part of Environmental
Management plan
Community liaison forum
Social Monitoring Plan
Identify indicators to monitor
Determine frequency of
monitoring
© Ptersa
Stakeholder analysis
 Important part of any SIA
 Need to know who you are working with and what
their needs and agendas are
 Help you to plan SIA process and with assessing
impacts
 Different ways to analyse who the stakeholders are
© Ptersa
Stakeholder Analysis Matrix
© Ptersa
Stakeholder Analysis Matrix (2)
 High power, interested people: these are the people you
must fully engage with, and make the greatest efforts to
satisfy.
 High power, less interested people: put enough work in
with these people to keep them satisfied, but not so much
that they become bored with your message.
 Low power, interested people: keep these people
adequately informed, and talk to them to ensure that no
major issues are arising. These people can often be very
helpful with the detail of your project.
 Low power, less interested people: again, monitor these
people, but do not bore them with excessive
communication
© Ptersa
Stakeholder Analysis Grid
More influence
Information giving
Dialogue
Less
impacted
on
More
impacted
on
Mine
Employees
Farming
community
Golf Course
Local
Village
Information gathering
Wider
Welkom
Community
Consultation
More passive
Less influence
© Ptersa
More interactive
Moletele Community
Claimants
Number
of
affected
people
Conservation
Community
Poor
Municipality
Social
Environmenta
l
Agriculture
Subsistence
Tourism
Visitors
Community
Rich
Tourism
Owners
Agriculture
Commercial
Adaptability/Resilience
© Ptersa
Stakeholder Analysis -PUL
Long term
Core Stakeholders
Power
Legitimacy
Immediate
Core Stakeholders
Violent or
coercive
Stakeholders
© Ptersa
Urgency
Dependant
Stakeholders
PUL Stakeholder Analysis Tool
 Power - stakeholders possessing power have the ability
to exercise their will despite resistance (Weber 1947).
 Legitimacy is defined as, “a generalised perception
that the actions of a stakeholder are proper or
appropriate within a socially constructed system of
norms, values and beliefs” (Suchman 1995, p574).
 Urgency, or “the degree to which stakeholder claims
demand for immediate attention
© Ptersa
Impact/priority matrix
Stakeholder
Interests
Potential
Impact
Priority of
importance
Primary
e.g. Land
owner
Will loose his
farm
Positive/
negative
High/
medium/
low
Secondary
e.g. Local
municipality
Provision of
infrastructure
External
e.g. NGO
Concerned
about pollution
© Ptersa
Planning with communities in mind
 Planning must be incremental – it is a process of trail




& error.
Planning must and can only be short term.
It must be simple.
Objectives must be attainable in a fairly short period.
Planning must involve everyone e.g. communities, EIA
consultants, authorities etc.
© Ptersa
How to plan a SIA process
 You must ask the right questions
 Why is a SIA required?
 What information is needed?
 What do you want to do with the information?
 Who has the information?
 How can the information best be obtained?
 How should it be analysed?
© Ptersa
Demarcate the study area
 Which communities will be included in the study?
 Will the impacts be experienced locally, regionally,
nationally or internationally?
 How detailed must the study be?
© Ptersa
Decide on methodology
 What does the affected communities look like?
 How much time is available?
 How much resources is available?
 How much money is available?
 What is the purpose of this SIA?
© Ptersa
Timeframes
 How long will it take to obtain information?
 How long will it take to analyse the data?
 How far is the EIA process?
 What other work has been done already?
© Ptersa
Roles & responsibilities
 SIA practitioner have many roles e.g.:
 Advocate
 Mediator
 Observer
 Catalyst
 Plan for processes associated with these roles, e.g.
integration meetings with other specialists, meetings
with clients, NGO’s, authorities, public consultation
team
© Ptersa
Last notes
 Be flexible
 Relationships are important – people are more willing
to accommodate you if there is a good relationship
between you and them – clients & communities
 Have an open mind
© Ptersa
© Ptersa
Social Change Process
 A discreet, observable and describable process which
changes the characteristics of a society, taking place
regardless of the societal context (that is, independent
of specific groups, religions etc.)
 Can be measured objectively
© Ptersa
Social Change process (2)
 The ways in which social change processes are
perceived, given meaning or valued, depend on the
social context in which various societal groups act.
 Some groups in society are able to adapt quickly and
exploit the opportunities of a new situation.
 Others (e.g. vulnerable groups) are less able to adapt
and will bear most of the negative consequences of
change.
© Ptersa
Social Change processes
 Social change processes may, in certain circumstances
and depending on the context, lead to the experience
of social impacts.
 Social impacts are therefore completely contextdependent
© Ptersa
Understanding social change
 Social change from the intervention can cause other
social changes to occur.
 Resettlement causes rural to urban migration, which
causes a change in food production.
 Social impacts can cause social change.
 Unemployment can cause rural to urban migration (e.g.
farm workers).
 Social change can cause biophysical impacts
 Increase in tourism have an impact on land use and
water quality
© Ptersa
Social change processes that can
result in social impacts:
 Demographic processes
 Economic processes
 Geographic processes
 Institutional and legal processes
 Emancipatory and empowerment processes
 Sociocultural processes
 Other processes
(Vanclay 2003)
© Ptersa
Demographic processes
 In-migration/out-migration
 Presence of newcomers
 Presence of temporary workers
 Presence of seasonal residents
 Presence of weekenders
 Presence of tourists/day-trippers
 Resettlement
 Displacement & dispossession
 Rural-to-urban migration/Urban-to rural migration
© Ptersa
Economic processes
 Conversion & diversification of economic activities
 Impoverishment
 Inflation
 Currency exchange evaluation
 Concentration of economic activity
 Economic globalisation (local goods compare with
imported goods)
© Ptersa
Geographical processes
 Conversion and diversification of land use
 Urban sprawl –urban areas expand into previously




rural areas
Urbanization – urban-to-rural migration &
densification of small towns
Gentrification – inner city suburbs convert from lower
class to middle or upper class suburbs
Enhanced transportation & rural accessibility
Physical splintering –highways, railways etc. through
neighbourhood.
© Ptersa
Institutional & legal processes
 Institutional globalisation & centralisation – loss of
decision-making at local level/local relevance. Central
management dictates
 Decentralisation – change in public admin system –
can local system handle it?
 Privatisation –transfer responsibilities from public to
private sector
© Ptersa
Emancipatory & empowerment
processes
 Democratisation – people granted increased influence
in political decision-making
 Marginalisation& exclusion – various groups in society
are denied access to services/participation
 Capacity building – increased knowledge, networking
capacity & increasing skill base amongst local people
© Ptersa
Sociocultural processes
 Social globalisation – “McDonaldization/ Coca-Cola
development” - compete with local culture
 Segregation –social differences in communities
 Social disintegration – loss of social capital, social,
cultural & kinship networks
 Cultural differentiation – increase in perceived
differences between various groups in community
based on culture, language, values etc.
© Ptersa
Other processes
 New processes continuously occur, impossible to
predict likely impact
 E.g. Social impact of internet
© Ptersa
© Ptersa
Social Impact Assessment
“Appreciate that all impacts are
social impacts and that people
experience the physical
environment in human terms.”
(Frank Vanclay)
© Ptersa
Social Impact
The consequence to human populations of any public
or private actions that alter the ways in which people
live, work, play, relate to one another, organize to
meet their needs and general cope as members of
society. Includes cultural impacts involving changes to
the norms, values and beliefs that guide their
cognition of themselves and their society
© Ptersa
In other words:
 Something that is experienced or
perceptions)
 …. A change in ……
 Positive or negative
© Ptersa
felt (physical or
What to consider in a SIA?
 People’s way of life – how they work, play and interact
with one another on a daily basis;
 Their culture – their shared beliefs, customs, values
and language or dialect;
 Their community – its cohesion, stability, character,
services and facilities;
© Ptersa
What to consider in a SIA?(2)
 People’s political systems – the extent to which people
are able to participate in decisions that affect their
lives, the level of democratisation that is taking place
and the resources provided for this purpose;
 Their environment – the quality of the air and water
that people use; the availability and quality of the food
that they eat; the level of hazard or risk, dust and noise
which they are exposed to; the adequacy of sanitation,
their physical safety, and their access to and control
over resources;
© Ptersa
What to consider in a SIA? (3)
 People’s health and well-being – where health is
understood as a state of complete physical, mental and
social well-being, not merely the absence of disease or
infirmity;
 Their personal and property rights – particularly whether
people are economically affected, or experience personal
disadvantage, which may include a violation of their civil
rights; and
 Their fears and aspirations – their perceptions about their
safety; fears about the future of the community; and their
aspirations for their future and the future of their children.
© Ptersa
Some indicators to consider
 Can be considered to provide information and assist in
determining impacts.
 Are not necessarily impacts in them selves.
 Some indicators are indicative of social change
processes which may cause impacts, some may be
impacts.
© Ptersa
Indicator 1: Population
 Population change
 Inflow or outflow of temporary workers
 Presence of seasonal (leisure) residents
 Relocation of individuals or families
 Introduction of people dissimilar in age, gender, racial
and ethnic composition
© Ptersa
Indicator 2: Community/Institutional
arrangements
 Formation of attitudes towards the project
 Interest group activity
 Alteration in size and structure of local government
 Presence of planning and zoning activity
 Industrial diversification
 Enhanced economic inequities
 Change in employment equity of minority groups
 Changing occupational opportunities
© Ptersa
Indicator 3: Conflicts between local
residents and newcomers
 Presence of an outside agency
 Introduction of new social classes
 Change in the commercial/industrial focus of the
community
 Presence of weekend residents (recreational)
© Ptersa
Indicator 4: Individual and family
level changes
 Disruption in daily living and movement factors
 Dissimilarity in religious practice
 Alterations in family structure
 Disruption in social networks
 Change in leisure opportunities
 Perceptions of public health and safety
© Ptersa
Indicator 5: Community
infrastructure needs
 Change in community infrastructure
 Land acquisition and disposal
 Effects on known cultural, historical and
archaeological resources
© Ptersa
Indicator 6: General concerns
 This would include aspects that have an influence on
the quality of life such as noise, water pollution and
sound pollution.
© Ptersa
Social Impacts as related to the
social change processes
 Health & social wellbeing
 Quality of the living environment
 Economic impacts & material wellbeing
 Cultural impacts
 Family & community impacts
 Institutional, legal, political and equity impacts
 Gender relations
(Vanclay 2003)
© Ptersa
Impact group 1: Health & social
wellbeing
 Death
 Nutrition
 Actual health & fertility
 Perceived health
 Mental health
 Aspirations for future
 Autonomy
 Stigmatization
 Feelings in relation to the project
© Ptersa
Impact group 2: Quality of the
living environment
 Physical quality
 Leisure & recreation opportunities
 Aesthetic quality
 Availability of housing
 Quality of housing
 Physical & social infrastructure
 Personal safety & hazard exposure
 Crime & violence
© Ptersa
Impact group 3: Economic impacts
& material wellbeing
 Workload
 Standard of living
 Economic prosperity & resilience
 Income
 Property values
 Employment
 Replacement cost of environmental functions
 Economic dependency
© Ptersa
Impact group 4: Cultural impacts
 Change in cultural values
 Violation of culture
 Experience of being culturally marginalized
 Commercial exploitation of culture
 Loss of local language
 Loss of natural & cultural heritage
© Ptersa
Impact group 5: Family &
community impacts
 Alterations in family structure
 Obligations to family/ancestors
 Family violence
 Social networks – interaction with others in




community
Community connection –sense of belonging
Community cohesion
Social differentiation and inequity
Social tension and violence
© Ptersa
Impact group 6: Institutional, legal,
political & equity impacts
 Capacity of government agency to handle workload






generated by project
Integrity of government agencies – absence of
corruption. Competence of agency
Legal rights
Human rights
Participation in decision making
Access to legal advice
Fairness of distribution of impacts across community
© Ptersa
Impact group 7: Gender relations
 Woman’s physical integrity – decide about own body
 Personal autonomy of woman – independence in all
aspects
 Gendered division of labour – income, household,
childbearing & rearing.
 Access to resources & facilities
 Political emancipation of woman
© Ptersa
Last thoughts
 Indicators are not enough, but can help in providing
guidance and to identify impacts.
 The social environment is complex, and assessment
need to take place on many levels.
 SIA is context specific, and sometimes it is necessary
to adapt your assessment and to use a different tool.
 SIA is just a tool – there are many ways to kill a cat!
© Ptersa
Uncertainty
 Social Impacts begin as soon as there are
changes in social conditions
 Something perceived as an impact is an
impact
© Ptersa
© Ptersa
© Ptersa
Mitigation
 Avoiding the impact by modifying or not taking an
action;
 Minimizing, rectifying or reducing the impacts
through the design of the project or policy;
 Or compensating for the impact by providing
substitute facilities, resources or opportunities.
© Ptersa
Requirements for mitigation
measures
 Practical
 Affordable
 Executable
© Ptersa
Mitigating social impacts
 Be specific
 Describe the mitigation in detail
 Link in with existing facilities
 Tell what, how, when
 Try and avoid giving sums of money
 Compensation is not mitigation!
© Ptersa
Ensure effective mitigation
 Get cooperation from developer
 Don’t suggest measures that developer cannot
implement
 Make sure it is acceptable to communities
 Be culturally sensitive
 Investigate options while conducting field work
© Ptersa
Ensure effective mitigation
 Aim for high-impact mitigation – where possible link
with existing programmes, services in communities.
 Ensure continuity – community liaison forums a good
method.
 Integrate with other specialists – do not contradict
each other.
 Make sure systems are in place for effective execution
of mitigation measures.
© Ptersa
Ensure effective mitigation (3)
 Think creatively
 Think out of the box
 Don’t suggest “fluffy” things – you will loose credibility
and nobody will understand what it means.
 Think long-term & sustainable
© Ptersa
Criteria for SIA
 Purpose of the SIA
 Project scale
 Level of vulnerability in the social
environment
 Nature and potential significance of impact
 Controversy
 Heterogeneity in the social environment
© Ptersa
Guidelines for the SIA
practitioner
 See from an insider perspective
 Listen without prejudice -notice your filters
 Work with understanding project aim
 Consider all relevant dimensions of the social
environment
 Continuously weave findings back into
planning and management
 Create a dialogue
© Ptersa
Guidelines for the SIA
practitioner
 SIA is an intervention in itself
 Clarify your role
 Respect
 Individuality -each community is
different
 Empower the community to speak for
themselves - ownership
 Beware of assumptions
© Ptersa
Useful information
 http://www.iaia.org/resources-networking/key



citations.aspx
http://www.iaia.org/publications/
Vanclay, F. & Becker, H.A. 2003. The International
Handbook for Social Impact Assessment. Cheltenham:
Edward Elgar Publishing Limited
http://www.engineersagainstpoverty.org/publications.
cfm
http://www.angloamerican.co.uk/aa/development/soc
iety/engagement/seat/
© Ptersa
103