Social Impact Assessment and Mitigation for a Large Pipeline Project

Edward Pollett, Richard A. Wyness

2006

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.2118/98861-ms
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Abstract In this paper the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline project is used as an example to provide information on the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) process and the practical mitigation measures that were developed to alleviate, minimize or compensate for predicted impacts on affected communities during the construction program. The BTC pipeline is 1,760 km long and was constructed in order to provide an export route for crude oil from the Caspian Sea through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey to a new marine terminal constructed at the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan. A considerable amount of social baseline information was gathered across all three countries that the pipeline crosses. Over 300 villages and 17, 700 parcels of land used by local households were affected. Social issues included: community interaction and effective consultation and disclosure; temporary land acquisition under complex land tenure systems; disturbance to local livelihoods and activities; community safety; local employment; and the potential impacts to marginalized and vulnerable groups, including ethnic minorities, women and the elderly. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) worked closely with the pipeline sponsors in designing an oversight mechanism to address the potential social impacts of the project. Examples of mitigation measures developed included the implementation of a major public consultation and disclosure program, including continued liaison with affected communities; a transparent land acquisition and compensation program; local employment and training; community investment programs; NGO capacity building and the enhancement of development impacts through linkages with SMEs. The project has set new regional benchmarks in transparency and the development of social mitigation practices. This paper will focus on the ‘lessons learned’ with respect to the appropriate scale of social baseline information for a project of this nature as well as provide information on the effectiveness or otherwise of the different types of mitigation practices and social standards developed for the project.