Reflections on Social Impact Assessment in the 21^st century

References

• Albrecht G. 2006. Solastalgia. Alter J. 32(4/5):34–36.
   Google Scholar
• Aucamp I, Lombard A. 2018. Can social impact assessment contribute to social development outcomes in an emerging economy? Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 36(2):173–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baines J, Taylor CN, Vanclay F. 2013. Social impact assessment and ethical social research principles: ethical professional practice in impact assessment Part II. Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 31(4):254–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brereton D, Owen J, Kim J 2011. Good practice note community development agreements. accessed 2019 Aug 16 http://www.eisourcebook.org/cms/files/csrm_good_practice_notes_on_cdas_document_final_260911.pdf
   Google Scholar
• CBD. 2004. Akwe´: kon – voluntary guidelines for the conduct of cultural, environmental and social impact assessment regarding developments proposed to take place on, or which are likely to impact on, sacred sites and on lands and waters traditionally occupied or used by Indigenous and local communities. Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. accessed 2019 Aug 16. https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/akwe-brochure-en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Dare M, Schirmer J, Vanclay F. 2014. Community engagement and social licence to operate. Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 32(3):188–197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dendena B, Corsi S. 2015. The environmental and social impact assessment: a further step towards an integrated assessment process. J Clean Prod. 108:965–977.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunlop CA, Radaelli CM, eds. 2016. Handbook of regulatory impact assessment. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Eoin L, King R. 2013. How to develop intangible heritage: the case of Metolong Dam, Lesotho. World Archaeol. 45(4):653–669.
   Web of Science ®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 D, Vanclay F. 2012. Social Impact Assessment: the state of the art. Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 30(1):35–44.
   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(2):137–145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franks D, Davis R, Bebbington A, Ali S, Kemp D, Scurrah M. 2014. Conflict translates environmental and social risk into business costs. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 111(21):7576–7581.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franks D, 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
• Galway LP, Beery T, Jones-Casey K, Tasala K. 2019. Mapping the solastalgia literature: A scoping review study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 16(15):2662.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Götzmann N, Vanclay F, Seier F. 2016. Social and human rights impact assessments: what can they learn from each other? Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 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. Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 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
• Hanna P, Vanclay F, Langdon EJ, Arts J. 2016a. Conceptualizing social protest and the significance of protest action to large projects. Extrac Indus Soc. 3(1):217–239.
   Google Scholar
• Hanna P, Vanclay F, Langdon EJ, Arts J. 2016b. The importance of cultural aspects in impact assessment and project development: reflections from a case study of a hydroelectric dam in Brazil. Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 34(4):306–318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidalgo C, Peterson K, Smith D, Foley H. 2014. Extracting with purpose. Boston: FSG.
   Google Scholar
• IFC. 2012. Performance standards and guidance notes. Washington DC: International Finance Corporation. accessed 2019 Aug 16. http://www.ifc.org/performancestandards.
   Google Scholar
• Jijelava D, Vanclay F. 2017. Legitimacy, credibility and trust as the key components of a social licence to operate: an analysis of BP’s projects in Georgia. J Clean Prod. 140(Part 3):1077–1086.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jijelava D, Vanclay F. 2018. How a large project was halted by the lack of a Social Licence to Operate: testing the applicability of the Thomson and Boutilier Model. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 73:31–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemp D, Owen J. 2018. The industrial ethic, corporate refusal and the demise of the social function in mining. Sustain Develop. 26:491–500.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemp D, Vanclay F. 2013. Human rights and impact assessment: clarifying the connections in practice. Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 31(2):86–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kvam R. 2018. Social impact assessment: integrating social issues in development projects. Washington DC: InterAmerican Development Bank. accessed 2019 Aug 16. https://publications.iadb.org/handle/11319/8917.
   Google Scholar
• O’Faircheallaigh C. 2017. Shaping projects, shaping impacts: community-controlled impact assessments and negotiated agreements. Third World Q. 38(5):1181–1197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. 2011. OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises (2011 edition). Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. accessed 2019 Aug 16. http://mneguidelines.oecd.org/guidelines/.
   Google Scholar
• Ogwang T, Vanclay F. 2019. Social impacts of land acquisition for oil and gas development in Uganda. Land. 8(7):109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsons R, Everingham J, Kemp D. 2019. Developing social impact assessment guidelines in a pre-existing policy context. Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 37(2):114–123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsons R, Moffat K. 2014. Constructing the meaning of social licence. Social Epistem. 28(3–4):340–363.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter M, Kramer M. 2011. Creating shared value. Harv Bus Rev. 89:62–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reddy G, Smyth E, Steyn M. 2015. Land access and resettlement: a guide to best practice. Sheffield: Greenleaf.
   Google Scholar
• Rodhouse T, Vanclay F. 2016. Is free, prior and informed consent a form of corporate social responsibility? J Clean Prod. 131:785–794.
   Web of Science ®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. Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 35(1):65–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations. 2011. The guiding principles on business and human rights: implementing the UN ‘respect, protect and remedy framework’. New York: United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. accessed 2019 Aug 16. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• van der Ploeg L, Vanclay F. 2013. Credible claim or corporate spin: A checklist to evaluate corporate sustainability reports. J Environ Assess Pol Manag. 15(3):1350012.
   Google Scholar
• van der Ploeg L, Vanclay F. 2017. A human rights based approach to project-induced displacement and resettlement. Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 35(1):34–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Ploeg L, Vanclay F. 2018. Challenges in implementing the corporate responsibility to respect human rights in the context of project-induced displacement and resettlement. Res Pol. 55:210–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2002. Conceptualising social impacts. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 22(3):183–211.
   Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2003. International principles for social impact assessment. Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 21(1):5–11.
   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. 2008. Place matters. In: Vanclay F, Higgins M, Blackshaw A, editors. Making sense of place. Canberra: National Museum of Australia Press; p. 2–11.
   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 Pol Manag. 17(1):1550003 (20 pages).
   Google Scholar
• Vanclay F. 2017a. Project induced displacement and resettlement: from impoverishment risks to an opportunity for development? Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 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. Current Opi Environ Sustain. 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. Imp Assess Proj Apprais. 31(4):243–253.
   Web of Science ®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 2019 Aug 16]. http://www.iaia.org/uploads/pdf/SIA_Guidance_Document_IAIA.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vanclay F, Hanna P. 2019. Conceptualising company response to community protest: principles to achieve a social license to operate. Land. 8(6):101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson E. 2019. What is Benefit Sharing? Respecting Indigenous rights and addressing inequities in Arctic resource projects. Resources. 8(2):74.
   Google Scholar