Social Impact Analysis and the Indigenous Rights Assessment 2022
VerifiedAdded on 2022/10/17
|14
|4264
|8
AI Summary
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
1
Social Impact Analysis and the Indigenous Rights
Name
Lecturer
Course
Date
Social Impact Analysis and the Indigenous Rights
Name
Lecturer
Course
Date
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
2
Social Impact Analysis and the Indigenous Rights
Introduction
Social Impact Assessment (SIA) is the assessment that is conducted when undertaking a
project. As its name suggests, SIA focuses on the social effects of a project. Whenever a project
is implemented, it brings environmental social and economic changes to the people and the
surrounding. Whenever any project is to be launched, a thorough and objective SIA must be
undertaken. The law requires that SIA should precede any project because there is a need to hear
from the concerned stakeholders. SIA has been applied in many projects including those
touching on the indigenous communities-the Aboriginals and the Torres Strait Islander people. A
typical project can have negative and positive economic and social impacts. The positive impacts
are desirable because they benefit the people. However, the negative ones are bad because they
cause losses, harm, and inconveniences. For a project to accomplish its objectives and be
considered to be beneficial to everyone, it must involve a SIA process.
SIA and the Indigenous Communities
Australia is a diverse society made up of people from different backgrounds. The country
consists of the majority whites and the minority immigrants as well as the indigenous
communities including the Aboriginals and the Torres Strait Islander people. The Aboriginals
and the Torres Strait Islander people, therefore, constitute the indigenous communities in
Australia (Colvin, Witt, Lacey & Witt 2019, p. 43). Just like the other indigenous communities
from across the globe, the Aboriginals and the Torres Strait Islander people are so disadvantaged.
These communities have suffered a lot of historical injustices in the hands of the colonial and
post-colonial government regimes.
Social Impact Analysis and the Indigenous Rights
Introduction
Social Impact Assessment (SIA) is the assessment that is conducted when undertaking a
project. As its name suggests, SIA focuses on the social effects of a project. Whenever a project
is implemented, it brings environmental social and economic changes to the people and the
surrounding. Whenever any project is to be launched, a thorough and objective SIA must be
undertaken. The law requires that SIA should precede any project because there is a need to hear
from the concerned stakeholders. SIA has been applied in many projects including those
touching on the indigenous communities-the Aboriginals and the Torres Strait Islander people. A
typical project can have negative and positive economic and social impacts. The positive impacts
are desirable because they benefit the people. However, the negative ones are bad because they
cause losses, harm, and inconveniences. For a project to accomplish its objectives and be
considered to be beneficial to everyone, it must involve a SIA process.
SIA and the Indigenous Communities
Australia is a diverse society made up of people from different backgrounds. The country
consists of the majority whites and the minority immigrants as well as the indigenous
communities including the Aboriginals and the Torres Strait Islander people. The Aboriginals
and the Torres Strait Islander people, therefore, constitute the indigenous communities in
Australia (Colvin, Witt, Lacey & Witt 2019, p. 43). Just like the other indigenous communities
from across the globe, the Aboriginals and the Torres Strait Islander people are so disadvantaged.
These communities have suffered a lot of historical injustices in the hands of the colonial and
post-colonial government regimes.
3
During the colonial period, these indigenous communities were driven away from their
ancestral lands. Indeed, this was the most serious injustice that these people have experienced.
Land alienation was a real disaster because these people have a very strong attachment to
traditional ancestor lands. Apart from this, the community has been experiencing a perpetual
discrimination. Unlike the rest of the Australian society, the indigenous community has been
deprived of the opportunities to access quality education, health care, employment, and any other
essential service that they should be entitled to (Saunders 2015, p. 142). This has made the
community to lag behind in terms of social, economic, and political progress and development.
Because of this, the government is becoming concerned about the indigenous communities.
Since they appear to be less empowered, the government is trying to ensure that the rights of
these indigenous communities are not trampled or violated any more (Aledo-Tur & Domínguez-
Gómez 2017, p. 59). That is why deliberate efforts have been made to protect the community’s
land, environment, and general welfare.
SIA is one of the strategies that have been applied in the pursuit for the protection of the
rights of the Aboriginals and the Torres Strait Islander people. The idea of the implementation of
SIA was conceived when the need of the safeguarding of the welfare of the community arose
(Esteves, Factor, Vanclay, Götzmann & Moreira 2017, p. 77). For a very long time, the
community had been suffering in the hands of the governmental and non-governmental entities
which could come up with a project and implement it without consulting the community
irrespective of the negative consequences of such projects (Crowley, Hinchliffe & McDonald
2017, p. 141). As a community, the indigenous people had a right to be involved in any of the
projects that is to be launched in their lands. This must be done because, as the land owners, they
should have a say on whatever takes place in their midst. At the same time, they give their
During the colonial period, these indigenous communities were driven away from their
ancestral lands. Indeed, this was the most serious injustice that these people have experienced.
Land alienation was a real disaster because these people have a very strong attachment to
traditional ancestor lands. Apart from this, the community has been experiencing a perpetual
discrimination. Unlike the rest of the Australian society, the indigenous community has been
deprived of the opportunities to access quality education, health care, employment, and any other
essential service that they should be entitled to (Saunders 2015, p. 142). This has made the
community to lag behind in terms of social, economic, and political progress and development.
Because of this, the government is becoming concerned about the indigenous communities.
Since they appear to be less empowered, the government is trying to ensure that the rights of
these indigenous communities are not trampled or violated any more (Aledo-Tur & Domínguez-
Gómez 2017, p. 59). That is why deliberate efforts have been made to protect the community’s
land, environment, and general welfare.
SIA is one of the strategies that have been applied in the pursuit for the protection of the
rights of the Aboriginals and the Torres Strait Islander people. The idea of the implementation of
SIA was conceived when the need of the safeguarding of the welfare of the community arose
(Esteves, Factor, Vanclay, Götzmann & Moreira 2017, p. 77). For a very long time, the
community had been suffering in the hands of the governmental and non-governmental entities
which could come up with a project and implement it without consulting the community
irrespective of the negative consequences of such projects (Crowley, Hinchliffe & McDonald
2017, p. 141). As a community, the indigenous people had a right to be involved in any of the
projects that is to be launched in their lands. This must be done because, as the land owners, they
should have a say on whatever takes place in their midst. At the same time, they give their
4
opinion on how such projects should be implemented and the expectations that they have
regarding them. Unfortunately, this has never been happening because the community has been
largely-ignored.
Case Study- The Browse LNG
SIA has become a necessity today. Whenever there is any plan to introduce any project
within the indigenous community, it is advisable to conduct a prerequisite SIA process. There are
many instances in which the application of SIA has been adopted in the community. There are
also many other occasions in which the SIA process has been omitted. Omission of SIA is
undesirable because it does not benefit the community. Apart from depriving it of its voice,
exclusion in the decision-making process exposes the community to lots of problems that would
otherwise be eliminated if there is a proper SIA process (O’Faircheallaigh 2017, p. 28). This
paper uses the Browse LNG project as a case study.
Browse LNG is a project that never was. In this project, plans were mooted to establish a
liquefied natural gas plant in James Price Point. This is an area located approximately 52
kilometers north of Broome in the western region of Australia. The purpose of the plant was to
process the natural gas that had been drilled from Browse Basin (Rodger 2019, p. 700). The
project was to be a joint venture to be undertaken by different investors including the BHP
Billiton Petroleum, Japan Australia LNG, BP Developments Australia, Royal Dutch Shell, and
Woodside Petroleum. With all these plans in mind, it shows that Browse LNG was intended to
be a valuable project that was to benefit the stakeholders in a number of ways. Apart from
generating revenues to the investors (in the form of profits), it would be a source of income to
the Australian government (O'Faircheallaigh 2015, p. 52). At the same time, it would create
opinion on how such projects should be implemented and the expectations that they have
regarding them. Unfortunately, this has never been happening because the community has been
largely-ignored.
Case Study- The Browse LNG
SIA has become a necessity today. Whenever there is any plan to introduce any project
within the indigenous community, it is advisable to conduct a prerequisite SIA process. There are
many instances in which the application of SIA has been adopted in the community. There are
also many other occasions in which the SIA process has been omitted. Omission of SIA is
undesirable because it does not benefit the community. Apart from depriving it of its voice,
exclusion in the decision-making process exposes the community to lots of problems that would
otherwise be eliminated if there is a proper SIA process (O’Faircheallaigh 2017, p. 28). This
paper uses the Browse LNG project as a case study.
Browse LNG is a project that never was. In this project, plans were mooted to establish a
liquefied natural gas plant in James Price Point. This is an area located approximately 52
kilometers north of Broome in the western region of Australia. The purpose of the plant was to
process the natural gas that had been drilled from Browse Basin (Rodger 2019, p. 700). The
project was to be a joint venture to be undertaken by different investors including the BHP
Billiton Petroleum, Japan Australia LNG, BP Developments Australia, Royal Dutch Shell, and
Woodside Petroleum. With all these plans in mind, it shows that Browse LNG was intended to
be a valuable project that was to benefit the stakeholders in a number of ways. Apart from
generating revenues to the investors (in the form of profits), it would be a source of income to
the Australian government (O'Faircheallaigh 2015, p. 52). At the same time, it would create
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
5
employment opportunities to so many people. There are many people who would directly and
indirectly get jobs in the plant. These are major benefits that would be enjoyed if the project
succeeded.
However, despite all these benefits, the Browse LNG project would bring some negative
impacts in the country. Just like any other natural resource extraction and manufacturing project,
the proposed plant would have some harmful effects. First, it would lead to a land loss by the
indigenous communities who, for centuries, have been living in James Price Point (Babcock, et
al. 2017, p. 385). The displacement of the indigenous communities is a very serious issue that
should not be taken lightly as it touches on land-a revered resource amongst these people.
Secondly, it would result in the degradation of the surrounding environment. The plant would
pollute water, land, and air. Through this pollution, the local population would suffer a great
deal. It would lead to the disruption of economic activities like fishing, livestock keeping, and
crop farming (Smyth & Vanclay 2017). These are economic activities which the local indigenous
community value because it is their chief source of livelihood. At the same time, the pollution
would interfere with human life. Exposure to impurities would cause respiratory diseases like
lung cancer and coughing, which can even lead to loss of lives.
Browse LNG SIA Studies
Although the Browse LNG has not kicked-off, it is an example of how SIA works. Over
the years, the project has attracted lots of concern from different stakeholders. The massiveness
of the project has made it to appeal a wide range of stakeholders who have a feeling that it is a
worthy project whose implementation would benefit and disadvantage the nation in equal
employment opportunities to so many people. There are many people who would directly and
indirectly get jobs in the plant. These are major benefits that would be enjoyed if the project
succeeded.
However, despite all these benefits, the Browse LNG project would bring some negative
impacts in the country. Just like any other natural resource extraction and manufacturing project,
the proposed plant would have some harmful effects. First, it would lead to a land loss by the
indigenous communities who, for centuries, have been living in James Price Point (Babcock, et
al. 2017, p. 385). The displacement of the indigenous communities is a very serious issue that
should not be taken lightly as it touches on land-a revered resource amongst these people.
Secondly, it would result in the degradation of the surrounding environment. The plant would
pollute water, land, and air. Through this pollution, the local population would suffer a great
deal. It would lead to the disruption of economic activities like fishing, livestock keeping, and
crop farming (Smyth & Vanclay 2017). These are economic activities which the local indigenous
community value because it is their chief source of livelihood. At the same time, the pollution
would interfere with human life. Exposure to impurities would cause respiratory diseases like
lung cancer and coughing, which can even lead to loss of lives.
Browse LNG SIA Studies
Although the Browse LNG has not kicked-off, it is an example of how SIA works. Over
the years, the project has attracted lots of concern from different stakeholders. The massiveness
of the project has made it to appeal a wide range of stakeholders who have a feeling that it is a
worthy project whose implementation would benefit and disadvantage the nation in equal
6
measure. Because this, there are different SIA initiatives that have been carried out. These
include the following:
The Customary Fishing Impact Study
This is the SIA study that was conducted by the Western Australia’s Department of
Fishing. The assessment was conducted between 2010 and 2011. The purpose of the assessment
was to study the negative effects of the proposed Browse LNG project on customary fishing in
the James Price Point region in which the plant was to be located.
From this assessment, it was established that the construction of the plant would have
adverse effects on the practice of customary fishing that, for a very long time, has been revered
by the Aboriginals living in this region. The local populations have been engaging in customary
fishing which, according to their culture, serves as the source of educational, domestic, personal,
commercial, and non-commercial purposes in line with the community’s customs, traditions, and
attachment to water and land resources (Holley & Mitcham 2016, p. 23). From the assessments,
it was established that the proposed project would have no positive impacts on the practice of
customary fishing. The stakeholders who were interviewed expressed their displeasure with the
project. Many people argued that the construction of the big plant would interrupt the fishing
activities. The kind of disturbance created will prevent the fish from surviving and reproducing
well in this environment (Mills 2019, p. 68). At the same time, the locals said that they would not
be comfortable fishing in the area because it would no longer be the source of edible, delicious,
and nutrient-rich oysters, small sharks, trout, red snapper, rock codes, silver bream, oysterback,
flatback turtle, green turtle, blue bone, coral trout, painted crayfish, maori sea perch, and many
other fish species valued by the cultural values of the Aboriginals living in this region.
measure. Because this, there are different SIA initiatives that have been carried out. These
include the following:
The Customary Fishing Impact Study
This is the SIA study that was conducted by the Western Australia’s Department of
Fishing. The assessment was conducted between 2010 and 2011. The purpose of the assessment
was to study the negative effects of the proposed Browse LNG project on customary fishing in
the James Price Point region in which the plant was to be located.
From this assessment, it was established that the construction of the plant would have
adverse effects on the practice of customary fishing that, for a very long time, has been revered
by the Aboriginals living in this region. The local populations have been engaging in customary
fishing which, according to their culture, serves as the source of educational, domestic, personal,
commercial, and non-commercial purposes in line with the community’s customs, traditions, and
attachment to water and land resources (Holley & Mitcham 2016, p. 23). From the assessments,
it was established that the proposed project would have no positive impacts on the practice of
customary fishing. The stakeholders who were interviewed expressed their displeasure with the
project. Many people argued that the construction of the big plant would interrupt the fishing
activities. The kind of disturbance created will prevent the fish from surviving and reproducing
well in this environment (Mills 2019, p. 68). At the same time, the locals said that they would not
be comfortable fishing in the area because it would no longer be the source of edible, delicious,
and nutrient-rich oysters, small sharks, trout, red snapper, rock codes, silver bream, oysterback,
flatback turtle, green turtle, blue bone, coral trout, painted crayfish, maori sea perch, and many
other fish species valued by the cultural values of the Aboriginals living in this region.
7
The Aboriginal Social Impact Study
The study was conducted by the Kimberley Land Council (KLC) which released its
report in 2010. As a government entity, the KLC has a mandate to oversee land management
affairs in the region. Whenever there is any such massive project, KLC must be involved because
such projects have a direct impact on land resources. Land is a valuable resource that must be
properly utilized in compliance with the law. Hence, in order to safeguard the land rights of the
Aboriginal community living in James Price Point, KLC had to conduct an objective SIA.
From the data collected, KLC found out that the construction of the new gas plant would
have massive social effects on the local populations. The report categorically stated that the plant
would benefit the people by creating jobs, and improving the living standards of the local people
who will get numerous opportunities. However, the project would also bring undesirable social
effects to the Aboriginal community in this region (O'Faircheallaigh 2015, p. 52). The first
negative impact of the project is that it would lead to the disruption of the cultural values of the
Aboriginals. For the project to be a success, it has to get huge tracks of land. This would be
disadvantageous because it would lead to land losses. Land loss can be disastrous because the
Aboriginals are indigenous people who have a very strong attachment to land. Besides, the
assessment found out that the construction of the project would cause social challenges such as
the disruption of economic activities that form part of the local community’s cultural values
(Mok, Shen & Yang 2015, p. 451). For example, there might be no more agriculture and fishing
in these ancestral lands. Finally, the project might harm the community by causing
environmental degradation and a rise in respiratory diseases. All these would bring a heavy
social burden to the locals.
The Aboriginal Social Impact Study
The study was conducted by the Kimberley Land Council (KLC) which released its
report in 2010. As a government entity, the KLC has a mandate to oversee land management
affairs in the region. Whenever there is any such massive project, KLC must be involved because
such projects have a direct impact on land resources. Land is a valuable resource that must be
properly utilized in compliance with the law. Hence, in order to safeguard the land rights of the
Aboriginal community living in James Price Point, KLC had to conduct an objective SIA.
From the data collected, KLC found out that the construction of the new gas plant would
have massive social effects on the local populations. The report categorically stated that the plant
would benefit the people by creating jobs, and improving the living standards of the local people
who will get numerous opportunities. However, the project would also bring undesirable social
effects to the Aboriginal community in this region (O'Faircheallaigh 2015, p. 52). The first
negative impact of the project is that it would lead to the disruption of the cultural values of the
Aboriginals. For the project to be a success, it has to get huge tracks of land. This would be
disadvantageous because it would lead to land losses. Land loss can be disastrous because the
Aboriginals are indigenous people who have a very strong attachment to land. Besides, the
assessment found out that the construction of the project would cause social challenges such as
the disruption of economic activities that form part of the local community’s cultural values
(Mok, Shen & Yang 2015, p. 451). For example, there might be no more agriculture and fishing
in these ancestral lands. Finally, the project might harm the community by causing
environmental degradation and a rise in respiratory diseases. All these would bring a heavy
social burden to the locals.
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
8
The Tourism Impact Assessment Study
This assessment was carried out by the KPP Business Development. This assessment was
performed between 2008 and 2009. Its final report was published in 2009. SIA not only focuses
on the social impacts, but also looks into the economic effects of the implementation of a project.
Therefore, in its study, KPP Business Development was only expressing its concern for the
economic implications of the implementation of the Browse LNG project.
From the assessment, it was discovered that the construction of the proposed natural gas
plant would have positive and negative effects on the economy of the individuals and
government as well. Obviously, the project would create so many job opportunities that would
benefit experts and the local Aboriginals. This is a good idea because, through such jobs, the
people would get to be empowered and improve their economic standards. However, in terms of
negativity, the study reported that the project would interfere with the tourism activities which
have been thriving in this place (Deng 2018, p. 42). Over the years, millions of people have been
visiting this part of Western Australia. It has a rich Aboriginal cultural heritage that has been
attracting so many tourists. However, with the implementation of this massive project, this
coastal region might no longer be attractive (Crossley 2018, p. 152). Hence, the tourism business
might stagnate or die. This is quite unfortunate because it will have disastrous effects on the local
Aboriginals who are struggling to assert their position in the mainstream Australian society.
The Implementation Strategies for an Effective SIA
From the Browse LNG case scenario, it is evident that SIA is an instrumental strategy
that should be incorporated in the course of the implementation of any project. if this project, for
instance, lacked a SIA, it would have had disastrous socio-economic implications especially to
The Tourism Impact Assessment Study
This assessment was carried out by the KPP Business Development. This assessment was
performed between 2008 and 2009. Its final report was published in 2009. SIA not only focuses
on the social impacts, but also looks into the economic effects of the implementation of a project.
Therefore, in its study, KPP Business Development was only expressing its concern for the
economic implications of the implementation of the Browse LNG project.
From the assessment, it was discovered that the construction of the proposed natural gas
plant would have positive and negative effects on the economy of the individuals and
government as well. Obviously, the project would create so many job opportunities that would
benefit experts and the local Aboriginals. This is a good idea because, through such jobs, the
people would get to be empowered and improve their economic standards. However, in terms of
negativity, the study reported that the project would interfere with the tourism activities which
have been thriving in this place (Deng 2018, p. 42). Over the years, millions of people have been
visiting this part of Western Australia. It has a rich Aboriginal cultural heritage that has been
attracting so many tourists. However, with the implementation of this massive project, this
coastal region might no longer be attractive (Crossley 2018, p. 152). Hence, the tourism business
might stagnate or die. This is quite unfortunate because it will have disastrous effects on the local
Aboriginals who are struggling to assert their position in the mainstream Australian society.
The Implementation Strategies for an Effective SIA
From the Browse LNG case scenario, it is evident that SIA is an instrumental strategy
that should be incorporated in the course of the implementation of any project. if this project, for
instance, lacked a SIA, it would have had disastrous socio-economic implications especially to
9
the Aboriginal inhabitants. This would have happened because without a proper SIA, the
proponents of the projects would have hurriedly implemented it as long as they believed that it
would be a profitable venture (Grieco, Michelini & Iasevoli 2015, p. 1188). However, for a
project like Browse LNG to be sustainable and serve the common interests of all the
stakeholders, there needs to be a proper SIA process. This can be achieved if certain
improvements are made on the design of the SIA.
First and foremost, the SIA process should be inclusive. When designing the SIA process,
it should be made to be as accommodative and inclusive as possible. In the past, the Aboriginals
have been raising lots of complaints because they are always not consulted while introducing
new projects regardless of the direct impacts of such projects on them. That is exactly what has
been done during the implementation of SIA programs. The exclusion of the Aboriginals has
been a bad idea because it hinders them from giving their views on such projects (Carley &
Bustelo 2019, p. 84). Therefore, to overcome such challenges and make the project to enjoy the
support of everyone, it is advisable to incorporate the contributions of all the stakeholders. Apart
from involving the government, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and the investors,
the members of the local community should also get an opportunity to participate in the SIA. For
example, when dealing with the Browse LNG project, the Aboriginal community should also be
involved (Crossley 2018, p. 152). This is a wise idea because it can help in improving the
efficiency and effectiveness of the project. The contribution of the local community members is
crucial because they know how the planned project can negatively and positively impact on their
socio-economic stability.
An effective and standard SIA should be properly-funded. Money is a useful resource
that should be availed when dealing with important activities such as the SIA program. In the
the Aboriginal inhabitants. This would have happened because without a proper SIA, the
proponents of the projects would have hurriedly implemented it as long as they believed that it
would be a profitable venture (Grieco, Michelini & Iasevoli 2015, p. 1188). However, for a
project like Browse LNG to be sustainable and serve the common interests of all the
stakeholders, there needs to be a proper SIA process. This can be achieved if certain
improvements are made on the design of the SIA.
First and foremost, the SIA process should be inclusive. When designing the SIA process,
it should be made to be as accommodative and inclusive as possible. In the past, the Aboriginals
have been raising lots of complaints because they are always not consulted while introducing
new projects regardless of the direct impacts of such projects on them. That is exactly what has
been done during the implementation of SIA programs. The exclusion of the Aboriginals has
been a bad idea because it hinders them from giving their views on such projects (Carley &
Bustelo 2019, p. 84). Therefore, to overcome such challenges and make the project to enjoy the
support of everyone, it is advisable to incorporate the contributions of all the stakeholders. Apart
from involving the government, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and the investors,
the members of the local community should also get an opportunity to participate in the SIA. For
example, when dealing with the Browse LNG project, the Aboriginal community should also be
involved (Crossley 2018, p. 152). This is a wise idea because it can help in improving the
efficiency and effectiveness of the project. The contribution of the local community members is
crucial because they know how the planned project can negatively and positively impact on their
socio-economic stability.
An effective and standard SIA should be properly-funded. Money is a useful resource
that should be availed when dealing with important activities such as the SIA program. In the
10
past, there are records of SIA initiatives that have failed due to poor funding. The activities of
such initiatives have crippled because there is no enough resources to support and sustain all its
operations in an efficient manner. Therefore, to ensure that SIA programs are successful,
appropriate measures must be taken by the concerned authorities (Kaplan‐Hallam & Bennett
2018, p. 307). This should be done by designing a budget that that contains a clear description of
the activities and the amount of money that is required to execute them. This means that there
should be enough planning prior to the actual implementation of the program. If adequate
finances are availed, the project can obviously succeed. This is a right observation because
money is required to hire personnel, remunerate the workers, acquire the prerequisite licenses,
purchase the equipment, and cater for any logistics. For example, if there is no money, it might
not be possible to source for the experts who have a sound knowledge of how to conduct an
effective SIA on such projects. However, without a proper budget, the entire SIA can fail
because each of these activities can be crippled. That is why it is important for such a project to
be supported by the relevant authorities.
For a SIA program to succeed, it should have enough time. Time, just like money, is a
useful resource that should be availed whenever engaging in a SIA initiative. Time is necessary
because a proper SIA program involves lots of activities each requiring a certain amount of time
to execute. Therefore, during the planning process, it is advisable to design a program that
contains all the activities to be conducted right from the beginning up to the very end (Wong &
Ho 2015). Some of the activities that should be incorporated in the program are planning,
baseline analysis, actual assessment, scooping, consultations, stakeholder engagement,
monitoring, and review. Each of these activities is quite demanding because they involve lots of
preparations, consultations, and decisions. There are many SIA programs that have failed
past, there are records of SIA initiatives that have failed due to poor funding. The activities of
such initiatives have crippled because there is no enough resources to support and sustain all its
operations in an efficient manner. Therefore, to ensure that SIA programs are successful,
appropriate measures must be taken by the concerned authorities (Kaplan‐Hallam & Bennett
2018, p. 307). This should be done by designing a budget that that contains a clear description of
the activities and the amount of money that is required to execute them. This means that there
should be enough planning prior to the actual implementation of the program. If adequate
finances are availed, the project can obviously succeed. This is a right observation because
money is required to hire personnel, remunerate the workers, acquire the prerequisite licenses,
purchase the equipment, and cater for any logistics. For example, if there is no money, it might
not be possible to source for the experts who have a sound knowledge of how to conduct an
effective SIA on such projects. However, without a proper budget, the entire SIA can fail
because each of these activities can be crippled. That is why it is important for such a project to
be supported by the relevant authorities.
For a SIA program to succeed, it should have enough time. Time, just like money, is a
useful resource that should be availed whenever engaging in a SIA initiative. Time is necessary
because a proper SIA program involves lots of activities each requiring a certain amount of time
to execute. Therefore, during the planning process, it is advisable to design a program that
contains all the activities to be conducted right from the beginning up to the very end (Wong &
Ho 2015). Some of the activities that should be incorporated in the program are planning,
baseline analysis, actual assessment, scooping, consultations, stakeholder engagement,
monitoring, and review. Each of these activities is quite demanding because they involve lots of
preparations, consultations, and decisions. There are many SIA programs that have failed
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
11
because of poor planning. The Aboriginals have been complaining that some SIA programs do
not create enough time to enable them adequately prepare and present their submissions
(Vanclay & Esteves 2015, p. 110). The experts also face a similar challenge because they do not
get adequate time to study the situation, engage the stakeholders, analyze the data, and present
their findings. That is why it is advisable to ensure that every SIA program is allocated enough
time no matter how urgent it might be.
Conclusion
In Australia, there are many projects that are introduced each year. While some
succeed, others fail because they end up not being implemented as planned. The failure of some
projects is subject to disapproval by the SIA. Therefore, unlike the Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA), that focuses on the environment, SIA centers on the identification, analysis,
and management of the economic and social effects of a project. SIA is a process that has been
embraced in Australia. SIA is an activity that should be taken seriously because it has many
benefits. It should form part of every project especially the big ones which have a direct social
and economic impact on the stakeholders. Since the government started protecting the welfare of
the indigenous communities, any project that touches on their ancestral land must be subject to a
rigorous SIA. This is exactly what has been done to the infamous Browse LNG project. The past
failures so far witnessed, though, can be resolved by having a proper design of the SIA
programs.
because of poor planning. The Aboriginals have been complaining that some SIA programs do
not create enough time to enable them adequately prepare and present their submissions
(Vanclay & Esteves 2015, p. 110). The experts also face a similar challenge because they do not
get adequate time to study the situation, engage the stakeholders, analyze the data, and present
their findings. That is why it is advisable to ensure that every SIA program is allocated enough
time no matter how urgent it might be.
Conclusion
In Australia, there are many projects that are introduced each year. While some
succeed, others fail because they end up not being implemented as planned. The failure of some
projects is subject to disapproval by the SIA. Therefore, unlike the Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA), that focuses on the environment, SIA centers on the identification, analysis,
and management of the economic and social effects of a project. SIA is a process that has been
embraced in Australia. SIA is an activity that should be taken seriously because it has many
benefits. It should form part of every project especially the big ones which have a direct social
and economic impact on the stakeholders. Since the government started protecting the welfare of
the indigenous communities, any project that touches on their ancestral land must be subject to a
rigorous SIA. This is exactly what has been done to the infamous Browse LNG project. The past
failures so far witnessed, though, can be resolved by having a proper design of the SIA
programs.
12
Bibliography
Aledo-Tur, A. & Domínguez-Gómez, J.A., 2017. Social Impact Assessment (SIA) from a
multidimensional paradigmatic perspective: challenges and opportunities. Journal of
environmental management, 195, pp.56-61.
Babcock, R., Lawrence, E., van der Velde, T., Pitcher, C.R., Tonks, M., Bessey, C., Harvey, E.
& Newman, S.J., 2017. Monitoring demersal scalefish populations in the Browse Basin
region: accounting for spatial variability and detecting change in key fish populations.
The APPEA Journal, 57(2), pp.382-387.
Carley, M.J. & Bustelo, E., 2019. Social impact assessment and monitoring: a guide to the
Literature, Routledge, New York.
Colvin, R.M., Witt, G.B., Lacey, J. & Witt, K., 2019. The community cost of consultation:
Characterising the qualitative social impacts of a wind energy development that failed to
proceed in Tasmania, Australia. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 77, pp.40-48.
Crossley, P., 2018. The Australian LNG Industry: Legal and Commercial Challenges. In The
International Political Economy of Oil and Gas (pp. 139-154). Palgrave Macmillan,
Cham.
Crowley, S.L., Hinchliffe, S. & McDonald, R.A., 2017. Invasive species management will
benefit from social impact assessment. Journal of Applied Ecology, 54(2), pp.351-357.
Deng, T., 2018. Structure Erection Technology for PAR Modules of Ichthys Onshore LNG
Project. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 10(2).
Esteves, A.M., Factor, G., Vanclay, F., Götzmann, N. & Moreira, S., 2017. Adapting social
Bibliography
Aledo-Tur, A. & Domínguez-Gómez, J.A., 2017. Social Impact Assessment (SIA) from a
multidimensional paradigmatic perspective: challenges and opportunities. Journal of
environmental management, 195, pp.56-61.
Babcock, R., Lawrence, E., van der Velde, T., Pitcher, C.R., Tonks, M., Bessey, C., Harvey, E.
& Newman, S.J., 2017. Monitoring demersal scalefish populations in the Browse Basin
region: accounting for spatial variability and detecting change in key fish populations.
The APPEA Journal, 57(2), pp.382-387.
Carley, M.J. & Bustelo, E., 2019. Social impact assessment and monitoring: a guide to the
Literature, Routledge, New York.
Colvin, R.M., Witt, G.B., Lacey, J. & Witt, K., 2019. The community cost of consultation:
Characterising the qualitative social impacts of a wind energy development that failed to
proceed in Tasmania, Australia. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 77, pp.40-48.
Crossley, P., 2018. The Australian LNG Industry: Legal and Commercial Challenges. In The
International Political Economy of Oil and Gas (pp. 139-154). Palgrave Macmillan,
Cham.
Crowley, S.L., Hinchliffe, S. & McDonald, R.A., 2017. Invasive species management will
benefit from social impact assessment. Journal of Applied Ecology, 54(2), pp.351-357.
Deng, T., 2018. Structure Erection Technology for PAR Modules of Ichthys Onshore LNG
Project. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 10(2).
Esteves, A.M., Factor, G., Vanclay, F., Götzmann, N. & Moreira, S., 2017. Adapting social
13
impact assessment to address a project's human rights impacts and risks. Environmental
Impact Assessment Review, 67, pp.73-87.
Grieco, C., Michelini, L. & Iasevoli, G., 2015. Measuring value creation in social enterprises: A
cluster analysis of social impact assessment models. Nonprofit and voluntary sector
quarterly, 44(6), pp.1173-1193.
Holley, E.A. & Mitcham, C., 2016. The Pebble Mine Dialogue: A case study in public
engagement and the social license to operate. Resources Policy, 47, pp.18-27.
Kaplan‐Hallam, M. & Bennett, N.J., 2018. Adaptive social impact management for conservation
and environmental management. Conservation Biology, 32(2), pp.304-314.
Mills, L.N., 2019. The conflict over the proposed LNG hub in Western Australia’s Kimberley
region and the politics of time. The Extractive Industries and Society, 6(1), pp.67-76.
Mok, K.Y., Shen, G.Q. & Yang, J., 2015. Stakeholder management studies in mega construction
projects: A review and future directions. International Journal of Project Management,
33(2), pp.446-457.
O’Faircheallaigh, C., 2017. Overcoming severe obstacles to public participation: indigenous
people and impact assessment procedures in Australia. In Public participation and
innovations in community governance (pp. 13-33), Routledge, New York.
O'Faircheallaigh, C. (2015). Negotiations in the Indigenous world: Aboriginal peoples and the
extractive industry in Australia and Canada, Routledge, New York.
O'Faircheallaigh, C., 2015. ESD and community participation: the Strategic Assessment of the
proposed Kimberley LNG Precinct, 2007–2013. Australasian journal of environmental
management, 22(1), pp.46-61.
Rodger, A., 2019. Better project delivery: Australia’s value opportunity. The APPEA Journal,
impact assessment to address a project's human rights impacts and risks. Environmental
Impact Assessment Review, 67, pp.73-87.
Grieco, C., Michelini, L. & Iasevoli, G., 2015. Measuring value creation in social enterprises: A
cluster analysis of social impact assessment models. Nonprofit and voluntary sector
quarterly, 44(6), pp.1173-1193.
Holley, E.A. & Mitcham, C., 2016. The Pebble Mine Dialogue: A case study in public
engagement and the social license to operate. Resources Policy, 47, pp.18-27.
Kaplan‐Hallam, M. & Bennett, N.J., 2018. Adaptive social impact management for conservation
and environmental management. Conservation Biology, 32(2), pp.304-314.
Mills, L.N., 2019. The conflict over the proposed LNG hub in Western Australia’s Kimberley
region and the politics of time. The Extractive Industries and Society, 6(1), pp.67-76.
Mok, K.Y., Shen, G.Q. & Yang, J., 2015. Stakeholder management studies in mega construction
projects: A review and future directions. International Journal of Project Management,
33(2), pp.446-457.
O’Faircheallaigh, C., 2017. Overcoming severe obstacles to public participation: indigenous
people and impact assessment procedures in Australia. In Public participation and
innovations in community governance (pp. 13-33), Routledge, New York.
O'Faircheallaigh, C. (2015). Negotiations in the Indigenous world: Aboriginal peoples and the
extractive industry in Australia and Canada, Routledge, New York.
O'Faircheallaigh, C., 2015. ESD and community participation: the Strategic Assessment of the
proposed Kimberley LNG Precinct, 2007–2013. Australasian journal of environmental
management, 22(1), pp.46-61.
Rodger, A., 2019. Better project delivery: Australia’s value opportunity. The APPEA Journal,
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
14
59(2), pp.709-711.
Saunders, P., 2015. Social inclusion, exclusion, and well‐being in Australia: meaning and
measurement. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 50(2), pp.139-157.
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.
Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 35(1), pp.65-80.
Vanclay, F. & Esteves, A.M., 2015. Current trends in social impact assessment: implications for
infrastructure developments. Place-based evaluation for integrated land use
management, pp.99-111.
Wong, C.H. & Ho, W.C., 2015. Roles of social impact assessment practitioners. Environmental
Impact Assessment Review, 50, pp.124-133.
59(2), pp.709-711.
Saunders, P., 2015. Social inclusion, exclusion, and well‐being in Australia: meaning and
measurement. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 50(2), pp.139-157.
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.
Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 35(1), pp.65-80.
Vanclay, F. & Esteves, A.M., 2015. Current trends in social impact assessment: implications for
infrastructure developments. Place-based evaluation for integrated land use
management, pp.99-111.
Wong, C.H. & Ho, W.C., 2015. Roles of social impact assessment practitioners. Environmental
Impact Assessment Review, 50, pp.124-133.
1 out of 14
Related Documents
Your All-in-One AI-Powered Toolkit for Academic Success.
+13062052269
info@desklib.com
Available 24*7 on WhatsApp / Email
Unlock your academic potential
© 2024 | Zucol Services PVT LTD | All rights reserved.