Impact Assessment: assessing the social dimensions of fisheries research projects in the Asia-Pacific Region

References

• ACIAR. 2014. Fisheries research program strategy. Canberra: The Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research. [accessed 2017 Sept 26]. http://aciar.gov.au/publication/fs027.
   Google Scholar
• ACIAR. 2017a. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research: where we work. ACIAR; [accessed 2017 26 September] Available from http://aciar.gov.au.
   Google Scholar
• ACIAR. 2017b. Incorporating fish passage into sustainable development practices and policy in Lao PDR. Canberra: The Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research.
   Google Scholar
• Aledo-Tur A, Dominguez-Gomez JA. 2017. Social Impact Assessment (SIA) from a multidimensional paradigmatic perspective: challenges and opportunities [Article; Proceedings Paper]. J Environ Manage. 195:56–61. English.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asselin J, Parkins JR. 2009. Comparative case study as social impact assessment: possibilities and limitations for anticipating social change in the Far North. Soc Indic Res. 94(3):483.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumgartner L, Marsden T, Singhanouvong D, Phonekhampheng O, Stuart I, Thorncraft G. 2012. Using an experimental in situ fishway to provide key design criteria for lateral fish passage in tropical rivers: a case study from the Mekong River, central Lao PDR. River Res Appl. 28(8):1217–1229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baxter P, Jack S. 2008. Qualitative case study methodology: study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report. 13(4):544–559.
   Google Scholar
• Béné C, Arthur R, Norbury H, Allison EH, Beveridge M, Bush S, Campling L, Leschen W, Little D, Squires D. 2016. Contribution of fisheries and aquaculture to food security and poverty reduction: assessing the current evidence. World Dev. 79:177–196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradshaw M, Wood L, Williamson S. 2001. Applying qualitative and quantitative research: a social impact assessment of a fishery. Appl Geography. 21(1):69–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bryman A. 2015. Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burdge RJ, Vanclay F. 1996. Social impact assessment: a contribution to the state of the art series. Impact Assess. 14(1):59–86.
   Google Scholar
• Centre for Strategic Economic Studies. 2012. The Impact of ACIAR Agricultural Research Programs on Poverty Outcomes: developing a methodology. Melbourne: Victoria University.
   Google Scholar
• Chambers R, Conway G. R. 1992. Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st Century. IDS Discussion Paper 296. Sussex: Institute of Development Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen P, Evans L, Govan H. 2015. Community-Based, Co-management for Governing Small-Scale Fisheries of the Pacific: A Solomon Islands’ Case Study. In: Jentoft S., Chuenpagdee R. (eds) Interactive Governance for Small-Scale Fisheries. MARE Publication Series, vol 13., Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17034-3_3.
   Google Scholar
• Dart J, Davies R. 2003. A dialogical, story-based evaluation tool: the most significant change technique. Am J Eval. 24(2):137–155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Den Broeder L, Vanclay F. 2014. Health in SIA. In: Fehr R, Viliani F, Nowacki J, Martuzzi M, Eds. Health in impact assessments: opportunities not to be missed. Copenhagen: WHO, EUPHA and IAIA; p. 69–88.
   Google Scholar
• Esteves AM, Franks D, Vanclay F. 2012. Social impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assessment Project Appraisal. 30(1):34–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fehr R, Viliani F, Nowacki J, Martuzzi M, Eds. 2014. Health in impact assessments: opportunities not to be missed. Copenhagen: WHO, EUPHA and IAIA.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer TB, Jha-Thakur U, Fawcett P, Clement S, Hayes S, Nowacki J. 2018. Consideration of urban green space in impact assessments for health. Impact Assessment Project Appraisal. 36(1):32–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattam C, Mangi S, Gall S, Rodwell L. 2014. Social impacts of a temperate fisheries closure: understanding stakeholders’ views. Marine Policy. 45:269–278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiruy K. 2014. Bottom-up driven community empowerment: the case of African Communities in Australia. Hobart: University of Tasmania.
   Google Scholar
• Islam GMN, Yew TS, Viswanathan KK. 2014. Poverty and livelihood impacts of community based fisheries management in Bangladesh. Ocean Coast Manag. 96:123–129.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lord F. 2011. Understanding social impacts by using new variables and a causal model diagram in New England fisheries [Article]. Impact Assessment Project Appraisal. 29(1):59–68.
   Google Scholar
• Mabon L, Kita J, Xue Z. 2017. Challenges for social impact assessment in coastal regions: A case study of the Tomakomai CCS Demonstration Project. Marine Policy. 83:243-251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.06.015.
   Google Scholar
• O’Connor W, Dove M, O’Connor MS, Xan L, Giang MCT. 2012. Building bivalve hatchery production capacity in Vietnam and Australia. Canberra: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research. FR2012-25.
   Google Scholar
• Orirana G, Siota F, Cohen P, Atitete T, Schwarz AM, Govan H. 2016. Spreading community-based resource management: testing the “lite-touch” approach in Solomon Islands. SPC traditional marine resource management and knowledge information bulletin  (37): 3-12 [open access]. New Caledonia: SPC Fisheries
   Google Scholar
• Pearce D, White L 2012. Including natural resource management and environmental impacts within impact assessment studies: methodological issues. ACIAR Impact Assessment Series Report No. 81. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research: Canberra. 52pp.
   Google Scholar
• Pierce, J. and O'Connor W. 2014. Impact of Oyster Farming on Rural Communities sustainability in Northern Vietnam. In: Sandhu S., McKenzie S., Harris H. (eds) Linking Local and Global Sustainability. The International Society of Business, Economics, and Ethics Book Series, vol 4. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Race D, Millar J 2008. Social and community dimensions to ACIAR research, ACIAR Training Manual 4, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, Canberra ACT 2601.
   Google Scholar
• Sherren K, Parkins JR, Smit M, Holmlund M, Chen Y. 2017. Digital archives, big data and image-based culturomics for social impact assessment: opportunities and challenges. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 67:23–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sukulu M, Orirana G, Oduagalo D, Waleilia B, Sulu R, Schwarz A-M, Van Der Ploeg J, Eriksson H. 2016. “Management over ownership”: modern community cooperation in Langalanga Lagoon, Solomon Islands. SPC Traditional Marine Resource Management Knowledge Information Bulletin(37):13-21 .
   Google Scholar
• Tacon AGJ, Metian M. 2013. Fish matters: importance of Aquatic Foods in Human nutrition and global food supply. Rev Fish Sci. 21(1):22–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thilsted SH. 2012. The potential of nutrient-rich small fish species in aquaculture to improve human nutrition and health. In: Subasinghe RP, Arthur JR, Bartley DM, Silva SSD, Halwart M, Hishamunda N, Mohan CV, Sorgeloos P, eds. Farming the waters for people and food. Proceedings of the global conference on aquaculture 2010, Phuket, Thailand. Bangkok: FAO, Rome and NACA; p. 57–73; [accessed 2010 Sept 22–25].
   Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2003. International principles for social impact assessment. Impact Assessment Project Appraisal. 21(1):5–12.
   Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2006. Principles for social impact assessment: a critical comparison between the international and US documents. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 26(1):3–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanclay F, Esteves AM, Aucamp I, Franks DM. 2015. Social Impact Assessment: guidance for assessing and managing the social impacts of projects. Fargo, ND: International Association for Impact Assessment.
   Google Scholar
• Wilder L, Walpole M. 2008. Measuring social impacts in conservation: experience of using the most significant change method. Oryx. 42(4):529–538.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar