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

References

• Ahmadvand M, Karami E, Zamani G, Vanclay F. 2009. Evaluating the use of social impact assessment in the context of agricultural development projects in Iran. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 29(6):399–407.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Branan Environment. 2014. Project Karmen: environmental and social impact assessment. Moscow: Branan Environment.
   Google Scholar
• Burdge R, Vanclay F. 1996. Social impact assessment: a contribution to the state of the art series. Impact Assess. 14(1):59–86.
   Google Scholar
• Cherp A, Golubeva S. 2004. Environmental assessment in the Russian Federation: evolution through capacity building. Im Assessment Project Appraisal. 22(2):121–130.
   Google Scholar
• EBRD 2014. Environmental and Social Policy. London: European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. accessed 2018 Jul 23. http://www.ebrd.com/news/publications/policies/environmental-and-social-policy-esp.html
   Google Scholar
• Ecoproekt. 2007. Environmental impact assessment materials for Denisovsky MINE of neryungriugol. Neryungri: Ecoproekt.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards M. 2009. Civil Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ehrenberg J. 1999. Civil society: the critical history of an idea. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Esteves AM, Factor G, Vanclay F, Götzmann N, Moreiro S. 2017. Adapting social impact assessment to address a project’s human rights impacts and risks. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 67:73–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esteves AM, Franks DM, Vanclay F. 2012. Social impact assessment: the state of the art. Im Assessment Project Appraisal. 30(1):34–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esteves AM, Vanclay F. 2009. Social development needs analysis as a tool for SIA to guide corporate-community investment: applications in the minerals industry. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 29:137–145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franks DM, Vanclay F. 2013. Social Impact Management Plans: innovation in corporate and public policy. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 43:40–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gӧtzmann N, Vanclay F, Seier F. 2016. Social and Human Rights Impact Assessments: what can they learn from each other? Im Assessment Project Appraisal. 34(1):14–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanna P, Vanclay F. 2013. Human rights, Indigenous peoples and the concept of Free, Prior and Informed Consent. Im Assessment Project Appraisal. 31(2):146–157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanna P, Vanclay F, Langdon EJ, Arts J. 2014. Improving the effectiveness of impact assessment pertaining to Indigenous peoples in the Brazilian environmental licensing procedure. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 46:58–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen AM, Vanclay F, Croal P, Hurup Skjervedal A-S. 2016. Managing the social impacts of the rapidly-expanding extractive industries in Greenland. Extrac Indust Soc. 3(1):25–33.
   Google Scholar
• Hartz-Karp J, Pope J. 2011. Enhancing effectiveness through deliberative democracy. In: Vanclay F, Esteves AM, editors. New directions in social impact assessment: conceptual and methodological advances. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; p. 78–95.
   Google Scholar
• Howitt R. 2011. Theoretical foundations. In: Vanclay F, Esteves AM, editors. New directions in social impact assessment: conceptual and methodological advances. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; p. 78–95.
   Google Scholar
• IFC 2012a. Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability. Washington (DC): International Finance Corporation. accessed 2018 Jul 23. http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/c8f524004a73daeca09afdf998895a12/IFC_Performance_Standards.pdf?MOD=AJPERES
   Google Scholar
• IFC 2012b. International Finance Corporation’s Guidance Notes: Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability. Washington (DC): International Finance Corporation. accessed 2018 Jul 23. http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/e280ef804a0256609709ffd1a5d13d27/GN_English_2012_Full-Document.pdf?MOD=AJPERES
   Google Scholar
• Kemp D, Vanclay F. 2013. Human rights and impact assessment: clarifying the connections in practice. Im Assessment Project Appraisal. 31(2):86–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kooiman J. 2003. Governing as Governance. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Lockie S. 2001. SIA in review: setting the agenda for impact assessment in the 21st Century. Im Assessment Project Appraisal. 19(4):277–287.
   Google Scholar
• Pisani JA, Sandham LA. 2006. Assessing the performance of SIA in the EIA context: a case study of South Africa. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 26:707–724.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam R. 1993. Making democracy work: civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Russian Federation 1993. The Constitution of the Russian Federation. accessed 2018 Jul 23. http://www.constitution.ru/en/10003000-01.htm
   Google Scholar
• Russian Federation 1995. Federal Law of 23.11.1995 № 174-FZ on Environmental Review (‘Ecological Expertise’).
   Google Scholar
• Russian Federation 2000. Order ‘On the Adoption of Provisions for the Environmental Assessment of Commercial and Other Activities’ No. 372 of 16.05.2000.
   Google Scholar
• Russian Federation 2002. Federal Law of 10.01.2002 № 7-FZ on Environmental Protection.
   Google Scholar
• Russian Federation 2004. Urban Development Code of 29.12.2004 № 190-FZ.
   Google Scholar
• Russian Federation 2007. Government Decree ‘On the Order on Organisation and Performance of the State Review of Project Documentation and Results of Engineering Surveys’ № 145 of 05.03.2007.
   Google Scholar
• Russian Federation 2008. Government Decree ‘On the Composition of Project Documentation and Requirements to Its Content’ № 87 of 16.02.2008.
   Google Scholar
• Russian Federation 2012. Code of Practice 47.13330.2012 Engineering Survey for Construction. Basic Principles.
   Google Scholar
• Seligman A. 1992. The Idea of Civil Society. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sibgiproshakht 2008a. Working Project of Denisovsky Open Pit Mine of Neryungriugol. Volume 1 Book 3. Environmental Protection and Environmental Impact Assessment. Novosibirsk.
   Google Scholar
• Sibgiproshakht 2008b. Construction Project of Inaglinsky Mine of “Yakut Coal – New Technologies”. Volume 3 Book 1. Environmental Impact Assessment. Novosibirsk.
   Google Scholar
• Sibgiproshakht 2008c. Project of Development of Northern Part of Chulmakan Eastern of “Yakut Coal – New Technologies”. Volume 1 Book 3. Environmental Protection and Environmental Impact Assessment. Novosibirsk.
   Google Scholar
• Smyth E, Vanclay F. 2017. The Social Framework for Projects: a conceptual but practical model to assist in assessing, planning and managing the social impacts of projects. Im Assessment Project Appraisal. 35(1):65–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solodyankina S, Koeppel J. 2009. The environmental impact assessment process for oil and gas extraction projects in the Russian Federation: possibilities for improvement. Im Assessment Project Appraisal. 27(1):77–83.
   Google Scholar
• UNECE 1998 Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (the Aarhus Convention) United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. viewed 2017 Dec 12, from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/aarhus/
   Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2003. International principles for social impact assessment. Im Assessment Project Appraisal. 21(1):5–12.
   Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2004. The triple bottom line and impact assessment: how do TBL, EIA, SIA, SEA and EMS relate to each other?. J Environ Assess Policy Manag. 6(3):265–288.
   Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2012. The potential application of Social Impact Assessment in Integrated Coastal Zone Management. Ocean Coast Manag. 68:149–156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2014. Developments in Social Impact Assessment: an introduction to a collection of seminal research papers. In: Vanclay F, editor. Developments in Social Impact Assessment. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; p. xv–xxxix.
   Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2015. Changes in the impact assessment family 2003–2014: implications for considering achievements, gaps and future directions. J Environ Assess Policy Manag. 17(1):1–20. 1550003.
   Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2017a. Project induced displacement and resettlement: from impoverishment risks to an opportunity for development? Im Assessment Project Appraisal. 35(1):3–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2017b. Principles to assist in gaining a social licence to operate for green initiatives and biodiversity projects. Curr Opin Environ Sustainability. 29:48–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanclay F, Baines J, Taylor CN. 2013. Principles for ethical research involving humans: ethical professional practice in impact assessment part I. Im Assessment Project Appraisal. 31(4):243–253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanclay F, Esteves AM. 2011. Current issues and trends in Social Impact Assessment. In: Vanclay F, Esteves AM, editors. New directions in social impact assessment: conceptual and methodological advances. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; p. 3–19.
   Google Scholar
• Vanclay F, Esteves AM, Aucamp I, Franks D 2015. Social Impact Assessment: Guidance for Assessing and Managing the Social Impacts of Projects. Fargo ND: International Association for Impact Assessment. accessed 2018 Jul 23. http://www.iaia.org/uploads/pdf/SIA_Guidance_Document_IAIA.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Warren ME. 2011. Civil society and democracy. In: Edwards M, editor. The Oxford handbook of civil society. New York: Oxford University Press; p. 377–391.
   Google Scholar
• World Bank, 2017. The World Bank Environmental and Social Framework. Washington (DC): World Bank. accessed 2018 Jul 23. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/383011492423734099/pdf/114278-WP-REVISED-PUBLIC-Environmental-and-Social-Framework.pdf
   Google Scholar