setting the social impact agenda

7/30/2019 Setting the Social Impact Agenda

1/11

E N V I R O N I M P A C T A S S E S S R E V 1 9 9 1 ; 1 1 :6 9 - 7 9 6 9

S O C I A L I M P A C T A S S E S S M E N T

S E T T I N G T H E S O C I A L IM P A C T A G E N D A :A N O R G A N I Z A T I O N A L P E R S PE C T IV E

L O I S M A R T I N B R O N F M A N

This case s tudy ex plores the role o f the soc ial analyst in se t ting the research age ndafo r soc ial impa ct assessm ent . Dra win g on in formation gathe red f r om in-depthstruc tured in terv iews wi th s ta f f a t O ak Ridge Nat iona l Labo ratory the s tudy repo rtson the va lues and at ti tudes o f the analysts , the ir kno wled ge of the law and thepo l it i ca l process , and the i r pe rcep t ions o f t he f ac tors i n te rna l and ex t e rna l t o t heresearch organization which af fec t ho w they do the ir jobs . The s tudy con cludesthat social analysts ha ve an imp ortan t role to pla y in legi timating socia l im pac tassessm ent wi th in the organization in wh ich they work; howev er, the ir ac t ions w i thre spec t t o def in ing the scope o f the agenda and in carry ing ou t t he m anda te o f thelaw are s t ruc tured by for ce s b eyo nd the ir control.

Cour t de c i s ions a nd c ha nge s i n r e gu la t ions , a s w e l l a s se r e nd ip i tous e ve n t s suc ha s t h e T h r e e M i l e I s l a n d n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t a c c i d e n t , h a v e e s t a b l i s h e d t h eimpor t a nc e o f soc i a l i s sue s i n impa c t a s se ssme nt ; a t t he sa me t ime the soc i a la na lys t ha s a l so ha d a s ign i f i c a n t r o l e t o p l a y in t he p r oc e ss . Wor k ing w i th inthe a ge nc ie s o r unde r c on t r a c t i n un ive r s i t i e s , r e se a r c h f i r ms , a nd f e de r a l l a bo-r a to r i e s , t he se i nd iv idua l s ha ve c on t r ibu t e d to de f in ing the soc i a l impa c t a ge ndaa n d t o s h a p i n g t h e N a t i o n a l E n v i r o n m e n t a l P o l i c y A c t ( N E P A ) a s a p u b li c p o l i c y .Th i s a r t i c le w i l l e xp lo r e how a g r oup o f the se so c i a l s c i e n ti s ts ma ke s t h e i r c ho ic e s ,t h e v a l u e s w h i c h t h e y b r i n g t o t h e i r j o b s a s a n a l y s ts , a n d t h e i r r e s p o n s e s t o t h eor ga n iz a t iona l a nd l e ga l bou nda r i e s w hic h s t r uc tu r e the i r a c tions w i th in a de f ine d

A ddres s r epr in t r eques t s to : L o i s M a r t i n B r o n f m a n , 6 0 2 N . E . H a z c l f e r n , P o r t l an d , O r e g o n 9 7 2 3 2 . 1991 E l se v i e r S c i e nc e P ub l i sh ing Co . , I nc .6 5 5 A v e n u e o f t he A m e r i c as , N e w Y o r k , N Y 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 9 5 - 9 2 5 5 / 9 1 / $ 3 . 5 0


2/11

70 L O IS M A R T I N B R O N F M A N

organiza t ional se t t ing , a federa l research labora tory . The case s tudy draws onin fo rmat ion ga the red f rom in -dep th s t ruc tu red in t e rv iews w i th s t a f f a t Oak R idgeN at iona l Labora to ry (OR NL ) abou t t he i r work in soc i a l imp ac t a ssessmen t (S IA)for envi ronmenta l impact s ta tements (EISs) over the per iod of 1970 to 1988.The l it e ra tu re on t echno logy and env i ronmen ta l a ssessmen t sugges t s two d i f -ferent in terpre ta t ions of the ro le of the research analyst in the pol icy process .O ne p erspect ive descr ibes the analys t as a neut ra l par tic ipant in the po l icy process ;an indiv idual who ident if ies imp acts , l ays o ut a l te rnat ives and pursues the idea lof comple te neut ra l i ty in the pol icy process . The analyst ought not engage inevaluat ing the impacts or choosing among a l te rnat ives ; such a task be longs tothe pol icym aker (N elk in 1984).

The o ther v iew recognizes the inherent ly pol i t ica l na ture of the task of tech-nology assessment and the p ivota l ro le tha t the analyst p lays in the task . Berg(1975) observes tha t in i t s ro le as a source of "objec t ive " expert kno w ledg e,techno logy assessmen t can both inf luence and leg i t imate publ ic pol icy decis ionsby hav ing the ea r o f bo th the po l i cymaker and the pub l i c . Thus , t h rough h i schoices , the analyst s truc tures the "expert know ledge " and funct ions in a pol it ica lro le in the process .W hi l e t he goa l o f ob jec t iv i ty i s acknowledged and accep ted by som e an a lys t s ,c r it ic s o f t he pos it ion a re n umerous . The y sugges t a fa r m ore com plex re l a tionsh ipof the analyst to the po l icy process . Shrader-Frechet te (1985) in her phi losophica ld i scuss ion o f t he m e thodo log ica l , ep is t emolog ica l , and e th ica l p rob lems fac ingthose who engage in envi ronmenta l assessment takes the posi t ion tha t the taskof t he ana lys t canno t be neu t ra l ; h is cho ices a re i n f luenced by h i s ow n va luesand by the cu l tu re o f t he en v i ronmen t i n wh ich he pu rsues h i s t a sks .T aylo r (1984) fur ther expl ica tes the re la tionship of the analyst to the organ-iza t ion w hen he descr ibes the tension tha t ex is ts be twe en the desi re of the appl iedresea rch ana lys t t o be "au tono m ous" wi th in the o rgan iza tion ( to se t h i s o wnprior it ies as to the na ture and co nduc t of h is s tudies) and the const ra in ts imp osedupon h im by l imi t ed re sources and conf li c ti ng no rms o f t he o rgan iza t ion . T heseconst ra in ts require " in tegra t ion " of the a naly st ' s va lues in to the p lanning process .S uch in teg ra tion is fac il it a ted by " in t e rna l ca rde rs o f va lue s , " i n m any in s tancesthe ana lys t s t hemse lves (Tay lo r 1984) and by "ou t s ide rs" t o t he agenc ies w hoapp ly p ressu re i n bo th fo rma l and in fo rm al way s . W andesfo rde -S m i th a l so sug -gests the importance of "organiza t ional en t repreneurs" in th is process . Thei rpe rsona l sk i ll s and know ledge o f t he o rgan iza t iona l cu ltu re a re po werfu l t oo lsin redef in ing the go als of an o rganiza t ion .

The s tudy o f soc i a l impac t a ssessmen t a t Oak R idge Na t iona l Labora to ryprovides the opportuni ty to explore these themes as they apply to a specia l izedgroup o f re sea rch ana lys t s ( t hose w ho do soc ia l im pac t a ssessmen t ) . In add i t ion ,i t perm i ts the explora t ion of the re la t ionship be tween the analys t and the organ-iza t ion from a s l ight ly d i fferent perspective than tha t usu al ly taken .O R N L's work on env i ronmen ta l a ssessmen t s i s under taken as a consequenceof con t rac t s be tween ORNL and a number o f d i f fe ren t sponso r ing agenc ies .


3/11

S E T r I N G T H E S O C I A L I M P A C T A G E N D A 71

O R N L i s re spons ib l e fo r pe r fo rming the spec i fi c t a sks desc r ibed in t he con t rac ts ,w i th t he work rev iewed and ap proved by the sponso r ing agency . Because o f t h i sre l a tionsh ip , t he ana lys t s a re an ex tens ion o f the sponso r ing a gen cy ' s s t a f f a l-t hough c l ea r ly no t " in h o u s e . " A s e m p l o y e e s o f O R N L t h e y a r e p ar t o f a d if f e r e n torgan iza t ion wi th i t s ow n cul ture and s t ruc ture , var iab les assum ed to be imp ortantin def in ing the i r ro le as researchers a nd in a ffec t ing the i r response to the spon -sor ing agenc y (Shrade r-Frechet te 1985; Tay lor 1984). W i th th is perspect ive , th i ss tudy supp lemen t s a g row ing body o f l i te ra tu re on the imp lem en ta t ion o f N EP A(Liroff 1976; Envi ronmenta l Law Inst i tu te 1981; Caldwel l 1982; Taylor 1984) .

O r g a n i z a t i o n a l BackgroundO ak R idge N a t iona l Labo ra to ry is a l a rge re sea rch fac i l i ty m anaged b y a p r ivat econ t rac to r (cu r ren t ly M ar t in M ar i e tt a ) w i th an admin i s t ra ti ve bu reauc racy andapprox ima te ly 5 ,000 em ployees , o f whom 40 a re soc i a l sc i en t is t s. A s a re sea rchfac i l it y , O R N L's h i s to ry began in 1943 wi th t he M anha t t an P ro j ec t. D ur ing thewar and fo r m any yea rs a f t e r , t he focus o f the re sea rch e f fo r ts o f t he L abora to ryremained o n nu c lea r ene rgy . A s a consequence o f exp lo ring p rob lems re l a ted tourban c iv i l defens e in the 1960s, the Lab ora tory u l t im ate ly h i red i t s f irs t soc ia lsc ien t is t s (Te ich and L am br igh t 1975). Th i s i n i ti a l g roup o f abou t t en em ployees ,wh o jo ined the s t a f f be tween 1969 and 1972 , was com posed o f econom is t s ,demographers , po l i t ica l sc ien t i s t s , and socio logis t s .B y the l a te 1960s the La bora to ry ' s a tt en t ion was a l so focused on env i ronmen ta li s sues . Enco uraged by Congress iona l i n te res t and g row ing t echn ica l awarenesso f t he p rob lem o f env i ronmen ta l po l lu t ion , O R N L began to exp lo re the concep to f a na t iona l env i ronm en ta l l abo ra to ry . F rom the beg inn ing , t h i s concep t i nc ludedthe no t ion o f i n t e rd i sc ip l ina ry work wh ich used the sk i l l s o f t he soc i a l a s w e l las physica l sc iences .

A l though O RN L was no t success fu l i n ou t li n ing a w e l l de f ined se t o f p rog ram sfo r a na t iona l env i ronmen ta l l abo ra to ry , i t d id l ead to a va r i e ty o f re sea rch e f fo r t sin the envi ronmenta l a rea and the es tab l i shment of a group of sc ien t i s t s sk i l leda t i nves t iga t ing env i ronmen ta l p rob lems . By 1975 , an Energy Div i s ion wasfo rmed . Wi th in th i s d iv i s ion was the S oc ia l Impac t Ana lys i s g roup headed byEl izabeth Peel le .The S IA g roup ' s compos i t i on va r i ed ove r t ime in t e rms o f t he d i sc ip l inesrep resen ted , t he deg ree o f p ro fess iona l educa t ion , and exper i ence . Compr i sedprim ari ly of socio logis t s , po l i tica l sc ien t is t s , p lanners , and an thropologis t s , theg roup has num bered be tween s ix and e igh t peop le and i s recogn ized a s the co reo f soc i a l impac t a ssessmen t a t t he Lab ora to ry .In t e res t ing ly , t he economic componen t o f t he S IA t a sk was neve r i n t eg ra t edfo rm al ly i n to the S IA g roup . In t he 1975 reo rgan iza t ion , a sepa rat e Econo m icA na lys i s S ec t ion was fo rm ed . M os t o f t he re sea rch e f fo rt s o f t h i s S ec t ion a t t ha tt ime ~vere i n a reas o f dem and fo recas t ing and reg iona l mo de l ing . W hereas t odayseve ra l economis t s spec ia l ize i n a ssess ing com m uni ty econo m ic impac t s fo r EIS s ,


4/11

72 LOIS MARTIN BRONFMAN

t he sepa ra t ion o f t he two approaches has pe rs is t ed ove r t ime . L ikew ise the re a reo the r soc i al sc i en ti s ts a t O RN L wh o con t r ibu te to re sea rch e f fo r ts i n a nu m bero f d i f fe ren t way s o the r t han th rough the E IS p rocess .S oc ia l impac t ana lys t s a t Oak R idge Na t iona l Labora to ry do no t under t akethe task of assess ing impacts in a vacuum. The indiv idual i s par t of a def inedpo l i cy p rocess ou t l i ned by l eg i s la t ion . A t t he sam e t ime , ana lys ts work wi th ina la rge research ins t i tu t ion tha t has a cont rac t re la t ionship wi th another la rgemiss ion o r regu la t ing ag ency o f t he fede ra l governmen t . In i t ia l l y t he i r work wasfo r t he Atomic Energy Commiss ion (AEC) , and subsequen t ly , a f t e r reo rgan i -z a ti o n o f t h e A E C , f o r th e N u c le a r R e g u l a to r y C o m m i s s io n ( N R C ) a n d t he U SD epar tmen t o f Energy (D OE ) . In recen t yea rs , t he Labora to ry has expanded i t s"work fo r o the rs" and has con t rac t ed wi th such agenc ies a s t he Depar tmen t o fD e f e n s e ( D O D ) a n d t h e F e d e ra l E n e r g y R e g u l a to r y C o m m i s s i o n (F E R C ) .The ex i s tence o f a con t rac t re l a ti onsh ip c l ea r ly adds a l eve l o f com plex i ty tothe organiza t ional m i l ieu in w hich the socia l analyst works . A l thoug h in terac t ionwi th the spon soring agen cy i s limi ted , there are form al contac ts a t specia l pro jec tmee t ings and th rough "channe l s" e s t ab li shed by O R N L superv i so rs . M ore im-portan t , whereas the Labora tory has responsib i l i ty for performing the speci f ictasks out l ined in the cont rac t , the u l t imate decis ion-making responsib i l i ty i s inthe hands o f t he sponso r ing agency wh ich rev iews and passes j udg m en t on theaccep tab il it y o f t he w ork done and on a ny conc lus ions d rawn by the ana lys t .Th e labo ra tory 's organiza t ion and cul ture are addi t ional var iab les wh ich def inethe contex t in which the ana lyst m ust opera te . Socia l sc ien t i s ts a re a min ori tyin an o rgan iza t ion domina ted , i n bo th numbers and l eade rsh ip , by phys i ca lsc i en t i s t s . The cu l tu re o f ORNL p romotes va lues re l a t ed to i t s func t ion a s aresearch fac i l i ty such as the v a lue of sc ien t if ic research , peer rev iew , pro fess ionaldeve lopmen t w i th in academic d i sc ip l ines , and independence f rom the po l i cyprocess (except a t the h ighest management levels) .

In t e rms o f t he spec i f i c t a sk o f env i ronmen ta l a ssessmen t , t he ana lys t i s amember o f an in t e rd i sc ip l ina ry t eam. In t he ea r ly p ro j ec t s t hese t eams weredom inated by physica l sc ien t is t s . Par t icu lar ly for h ighly cont rovers ia l EIS s , thework o f t he team i s g iven "ex tens ive c ross d i sc ip l ina ry and m anage m en t rev i ew"wi th in the Labora tory before i t i s forwarded to the sponsoring agency (PeeUe1982).

In addi t ion to the above charac ter i st ics of the org aniza t ion .with wh ich theana lys t m us t dea l , t he p repa ra t ion o f t he docum en t s p rov ides m any oppor tun it ie sfor ex ternal inf luence e i ther f rom o ther agencies or the publ ic . T hese o pportuni t iescan come a t scop ing mee t ings ( some o f wh ich a re pub l i c ) , t h rough the fo rma lcomment s f rom the pub l i c and o the r agenc ies a f t e r requ i red pub l i c rev i ew o fd ra f t env ironmen ta l s t a temen t s , t h rough pub l ic hea r ings and m ee t ings , and f romsi te v is i t s and le t te rs . F ina l ly , the process i s a ffec ted by a ny judic ia l in terpre ta t ionof t he l aw , by rev i s ions o f t he manda te by Congress , o r by changes in t hegu ide lines and regu la t ions o f t he Coun c i l on E nv i ronmen ta l Qua l i t y .


5/11

S E T TI N G T H E S O C I A L IM P A C T A G E N D A 73

R e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e A n a l y s t to t h e O r g a n i z a t i o n a l C o n t e x tAn in i t i a l p r ob le m w a s the e s t a b l i shme nt o f c r e d ib i l i t y a nd r e Spe Ct be tw e e n thephy s i c a l s c i en t i s ts a nd the soc i a l s c i e n t is t s . As on e ma n a ge r no te d , t he pe r spe c t iveof ma ny a t t he L a bor a to r y in t he e a r ly 1970s w a s t ha t a l l soc i a l s c i e n t i s t s w e r e" f u z z y h e a d e d ; " a t b e s t t h e ir m e t h o d s w e r e s c i en t if ic a l ly p r i m i t iv e . N o t a l l s o c ia ls c ie n ti st s w e r e v a l u e d t h e s a m e . E c o n o m i s t s e n j o y e d m u c h m o r e s t a tu s t h a npo l i t i c a l s c i e n t i s t s o r soc io log i s t s : " The se pe op le de a l t w i th numbe r s a nd e qua -t i o n s . "A s d i sc usse d b e low , a va r i e ty o f f a c to r s c on t r ibu t e d to a r ise i n s ta tus w i th int h e o r g a n i z a ti o n f o r t h e s o c i al s c ie n t is t o v e r ti m e . T h e m o s t o b v i o u s m e a s u r e o ft h is c h a n g e i n s t a tu s w i th i n t h e E I S p r o c e s s i s t h e d e s ig n a t i o n n o w o f s o m e s o c i a ls c ie n ti st s a s E I S p r o j e c t m a n a g e r s . A r e s id u e o f s u s p ic i o n b e t w e e n t h e t w o g r o u p sst i l l exists .D e s p i te p r o b l e m s o f s ta t u s, t h e s o c i al a n a ly s t s o b v i o u s l y v i e w e d t h e m s e l v e sa s e m p l o y e e s o f O R N L . A l t h o u g h t h e c o n t r a c t r e la t io n s h i p w i th t h e s p o n s o r i n ga g e n c y p r o v i d e s t h e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r c o m p e t i n g v a l u e s a n d p r i o r i t i e s t o c a u s ep r e s s u re o r c o n f u s e th e t a s k o f th e a n a l y s t, t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o f m o s t i n t e rv i e w e e si s w e l l de f ine d : t he r e i s " us" a nd the r e i s " the m. " Sponsor s a r e suspe c t ; a t be s tt h e y " n e e d t o b e e d u c a t e d , " a n d a t t h e w o r s t t h e y a re " t h e e n e m y . " O n e w a y t oc r i t i c i z e a supe r v i so r i s t o sa y , a s se ve r a l i n t e r v i e w e e s d id , t ha t he pa ys t oom uc h a t t e n t ion to the de s i r e s o f t he sponsor . C le a r ly , the se a na lys t s w a n t t ov i e w t h e m s e l v e s a s i n d e p e n d e n t o f t h e s p o n s o r . T h i s p e r s p e c t i v e i s s u p p o r t e db y t h e c u l t u r e o f t h e L a b o r a t o r y w h i c h v a l u e s t h e r e s e a r c h e r ' s i n d e p e n d e n c ef r o m t h e p o l i c y p r o c e s s .

V a l u e s o f t h e A n a l y s t sA s w o u l d b e e x p e c t e d w i th n e w P h D s w h o w e r e s c h o o l e d d u r in g t h e 1 9 6 0 s a n d1 9 7 0 s , t h e r e i s a c o m m i t m e n t t o t h e s c i e n t i f i c m e t h o d . T h e n e e d t o i n t e g r a t es c i e n t i f i c r i g o r i n t o t h e p r o c e s s a n d t o r e d u c e s u b j e c t i v i t y w a s v i e w e d b y t h esoc i a l s c i e n ti s ts a s a n imp or t a n t f ir s t t a sk i n t he de v e lop m e nt o f soc i a l imp a c ta s s e s s m e n t .E x p e r i e n c e w i t h t h e E I S p r o c e s s , h o w e v e r , h a s f a m i l i a ri z e d t h e s e i n v e s ti g a to r sw i t h i t s e v a l u a t i v e a sp e c t s. T h e y a r e c o m f o r t a b l e as s is ti n g t h e s p o n s o r i n d e f i n in gt h e s c o p e o f a d o c u m e n t f o r a p a r ti c u l ar p r o j e c t, a t a sk w h i c h r e q u i r e s w e i g h i n gd ive r se va r i a b l e s by the i r impor t a nc e . In f a c t , ma ny no te t h i s i n f lue nc e a s a ni m p o r t a n t w a y i n w h i c h t h e y a f f e c t t h e p o l i c y p r o c e ss .T h e f u n d a m e n t a l p o l i c y ta s k o f " ju d g i n g t h e c o r r e c t n e s s " ( as d e f i n e d b y p u r -p o s e ) o f a c e r t a i n c o u r s e o f a c t io n i s n o t o n e w i th w h i c h m o s t f e e l c o m f o r t a b l e ;t h i s ta sk be s t f e l l on the shou lde r s o f the a f f e c t e d pa r t i e s ( e . g . , t he spo nso r a ndthe pub l i c ) .W h i l e m o s t a n a l y s t s v a l u e d t h e i r E I S w o r k , m a n y n o t e d t h e c o m p e t i t i o n


6/11

74 LOIS MARTINBRONFMAN

b e t w e e n t h e d e m a n d s o f E I S w o r k a n d t h e d e m a n d s o f t h e i r d i s c ip l in e s t o e n g a g ein mor e ba s i c r e se a r c h .

W i th t h e e x c e p t i o n o f s o m e o f t h e e a r li e st m e m b e r s o f th e s t a f f, m o s t o f t h ei n te r v i ew e e s h a d r e a d o r s t u d i e d N E P A b e f o r e j o i n i n g t h e L a b o r a t o r y st a ff ; a llh a d a " b r o a d " i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f w h a t N E P A r e q u i r e d ; a n d i n s e v e r a l c a s e s t h ea na lys t ha d a ve r y spe c i f i c a ge nda to p r omote . An e a r ly pa r t i c ipa n t r e pr e se n t sa c a se i n po in t . U s ing the t e r m " soc i a l e ng in e e r " to de f ine he r se l f , she obse r ve d :" [ I] v i e w e d t h e w o r k a s a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o a p p l y w h a t w e k n e w a n d t o c h a n g et h e w a y t h e c o u n t r y w a s u s in g it s r e s o u rc e s . N E P A w a s t h e b i b l e . " T h i s s e n s eo f h a v i n g a n o p p o r t u n i ty t o a f f e c t t h e p o l i c y p r o c e ss a n d t o p r o m o t e a s p e c if ica g e n d a w a s r e p e a t e d o f te n .

F r om the pe r spe c t ive o f t he soc i a l impa c t a ge nda , t h i s me a n t : va lu ing pe op le" a s m uc h a s f i sh ;" i n te gr a t ing e xpe r t a s se ssme nt w i th pub l i c pe r c e p t ions ; pa y inggr e a t e r a t te n t ion to e qu i ty i s sue s a s opp ose d to e f f i c i e nc y i s sue s ; p r o m ot ingm e c h a n i s m s f o r p u b l ic i n v o l v e m e n t i n th e d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s; e x p a n d i n gt h e s c o p e o f t h e i m p a c t a s s e ss m e n t f r o m i s s u es p r i m a r il y re l a te d t o c o m m u n i t yin f r a st r uc tu re t o m or e sub je c t ive i ssue s o f psyc ho lo g ic a l he a l th , p e r c e iv e d r isk ,qua l i t y o f l i f e a nd soc i a l c ha nge ; a nd p r omot ing mi t iga t ion , moni to r ing a ndinc e n t ive p r ogr a ms .

B e c a u s e o f t h e s e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f w h a t t h e s c o p e o f t h e d o c u m e n t s h o u l di n c l u d e , t h e r e c e n t P A N E d e c i s i o n ( 4 6 0 U S 7 6 6 1 1 9 8 6 ] ) b y t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t ,w h i c h p r e c l u d e s t h e a s s e s s m e n t o f c e r ta i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l a n d c o m m u n i t y i m p a c t s ,i s unse t t l ing to t he se a na lys t s. W hi l e mo s t ha ve c o nc lud e d tha t t he c our t s imp lyma de a mi s t a ke , t he no t ion tha t t he r e a r e l imi t s t o w ha t i s a ppr opr i a t e i n ad o c u m e n t h a s n o t b e e n l o s t a n d i n d iv i d u a l r e s ea r c h e rs s e e m t o b e w o r k i n g o u tthe i r ow n a c c e p ta b l e bounda r i e s .

W h i l e c o m m i t te d t o a b r o a d i n t er p re t a ti o n o f N E P A a n d t h e e s t ab l i s h m e n t o fN E P A ' s v a l u e s w it h in b o t h O R N L a n d s p o n s o r i n g o rg a n i z a ti o n s , th e a n a ly s t s a r ea w a r e o f th e i r la c k o f c o n t r o l o v e r th e d y n a m i c s o f a s s e s sm e n t p r o c e s s . T h i s h a sno t l e d t he m to c on c lude tha t the y ha v e no in f lue nc e in t he de c i s ion-m a king t a sk :

We are not simply a tool o f the sponsor. I understand the argument that the EIS is merelya document designed to legitimate a predetermined action. Although there are times whenwe have felt this was the case, we never approach the task with this interpretation. We dohave reasonable control over small decisions.

Sett ing the Social Impact AgendaTh e p r oc e ss o f se t ti ng the soc ia l imp a c t a ge nda w i th in t he o r ga n iz a t ion invo lve dthree tasks :

( 1 ) e s t a b l ish ing the l e g i tima c y o f S IA;( 2 ) e xpa n d ing the sc op e o f t he impa c t a na lys is be yo nd in f r a s tr uc tu r e c ons id -e ra t ions ; and


7/11

S E T TI N G T H E S O C I A L IM P A C T A G E N D A 73

( 3 ) r e fi n in g a n d a p p l y i n g m e t h o d s w h i c h a l l o w e d n o t o n l y t h e q u a n t i f y in g o fimpa c t s , bu t t he i nc lus ion o f qua l i t a t i ve i n f o r ma t ion in t he a s se ssme nt .

T h e t a s k o f le g i ti m a t in g t h e v a l u e s o f s o c i al i m p a c t a s s e s sm e n t w a s , b y m o s ta c c ou n t s , f a c i l i t a te d by the e n t r e pr e ne u r i a l sk i ll s o f E l i z a be th Pe e l l e , a soc io log i s ta t th e L a b o r a t o r y w h o s e v i s i o n o f N E P A a n d e x p e r i e n c e w i t h t h e o r g a n iz a ti o n a lc u l t u re o f t h e L a b o r a t o r y fo c u s e d e a r l y a t te n t io n o n E I S w o r k r e g a r d i n g s o c i a limpa c t i s sue s .Se ve r a l mi l e s tone s w e r e i de n t i f i e d a s s ign i f i c a n t i n t h i s l e g i t ima t ing p r oc e ss .F i rs t w a s t h e r e c o g n i t i o n b y a t le a s t o n e E I S m a n a g e r t h a t th e a n a l y si s o f a s o c ia limp a c t re qu i r e d the sk i l ls o f som e on e tr a ine d in t he soc i a l s c i e nc e s : a n " e x pe r t . "T h i s f i r s t s t e p c a m e i n 1 9 7 1 w i t h t h e a s s i g n m e n t o f P e e l l e t o t h e M e n d o c i n on u c l e a r r e a c t o r e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t s t a t e m e n t p r o j e c t. P e e l l e w a s a b l e t o g e ta d d i ti o n a l f u n d i n g t o d o a s p e c i al s o c i al i m p a c t s t u d y o f t h e M e n d o c i n o p r o j e c t .

F r o m t h i s s t u d y c a m e t h e s e c o n d m i l e s t o n e i n l e g i t i m a t i n g s o c i a l i m p a c ta s s e ss m e n t a t t h e L a b o r a t o r y . P e e l l e s o u g h t to o b t a i n p e e r r e v i e w ( i . e . , f r o mothe r soc i a l s c ie n t i st s ) ou t s ide t he O R N L f or he r w or k . She s t a t e s tha t f o r thes o c ia l s c i en c e s t o b e r e s p e c t e d a t t h e L a b o r a t o r y , t h e y h a d t o f o l l o w t h e s a m er u le s a s t h e o t h e r s c i e n c es . H e r i n it ia l r e q u e s t w a s t u r n e d d o w n b y h e r i m m e d i a t esupe r v i so r ; bu t t he de c i s ion w a s ove r r u l e d a f t e r Pe e l l e a ppe a l e d i t t o t he he a do f t h e L a b o r a t o r y .Othe r ma jor mi l e s tone s i n t he l e g i t ima t ing p r oc e ss i de n t i f i e d by in t e r v i e w e e sinvo lve d r ou t in i z ing the a c t iv i t i e s o f t he soc i a l s c i e n t i s t w i th in t he EIS p r oc e ssa t t he L a bo r a to r y a nd e s t a b l ish ing ju r i sd i c t i ona l l imi t s . A ye a r a f t e r t he L a bo-r a to r y b e g a n N E P A w o r k i n 1 9 7 1 , t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t in H a n l y V . M i tc h e ll ( 4 6 0F . 2 d 6 4 0 [ 1 9 7 2 ] ) a f fi r m e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f ta k i n g i n t o c o n s i d e r a ti o n th e h u m a ne n v i r o n m e n t . I t w a s n o t u n t i l 1 9 7 4 , h o w e v e r , t h a t a s o c ia l i m p a c t a n a l y s t w a sr ou t ine ly a s s igne d to a ne w s t a t e me nt , o r w a s a l l ow e d to r e que s t a dd i t i ona li n f o r m a t i o n a n d a n a l y s e s f r o m t h e a p p l i c a n t t o b e u s e d i n p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h es t at e m e n t . O r g a n i z a ti o n a l r e c o g n i ti o n o f S I A a t th e L a b o r a t o r y c a m e i n 1 9 7 5w i t h t h e f o r m a t i o n o f t h e S o c i a l I m p a c t A s s e s s m e n t G r o u p ( w i t h P e e l l e a s t h egr oup l e a de r ) .T h e u l t im a t e i n d i c a to r o f t h e l e g i t i m a c y o f s o c i a l im p a c t a n a l y si s i n t h e E I Sp r o c e s s c a m e i n 1 9 7 9 , w h e n t h e L a b o r a t o r y a n d t h e N R C p u b l i s h e d a F i n a lE n v i r o n m e n t S t a te m e n t w h i c h r e c o m m e n d e d t h e d en i a l o f t h e a p p l i c a n t 's r e q u e s tf o r a n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t l i c e n s e b a s e d p r i m a r i l y o n u n a c c e p t a b l e a e s t h e t i ci m p a c t s . T h i s w a s t h e f ir st a n d o n l y t i m e s u c h a re c o m m e n d a t i o n h a s b e e n m a d e( Pe t r i c h 1984) .

Ro le o f An alyst in Setting the SIA AgendaAl l o f t he i n t e r v i e w e e s a r e a w a r e t ha t t he i s sue s t o w hic h the soc i a l impa c ta n a l y st h a d a d d r e s s e d a t t en t i o n h a v e c h a n g e d o v e r ti m e , a n d i n t h i s s e n s e th e


8/11

76 LOIS MARTIN BRONFMAN

S IA agenda has a l so changed . They obse rve , fo r example , t ha t oppor tun i t i e shave a r i sen wh ich have a l lowed them to mo ve bey ond the ana lys i s o f t he impac t son infras t ruc ture (e .g . , schools , t ra ff ic and hou sing) to conside ra t ion of psycho -logica l , po l i t ica l , cu l tura l , an d aes the t ic impacts .Th ey no te t ha t wh i le t he focus o f t he ir a t ten t ion has a lw ays been on a ssess ingthe d i s t ri bu tion o f impac t s (a s opp osed to quan t i fy ing and com par ing to t a l cos tswi th t o ta l bene f it s ), t hey have m oved to m ore gene ra l d i scuss ions o f wha t con -s t i tu tes " fa i rness" and to the explora t ion of a l te rnat ive ac t ions designed to pro-mo te fa irness . T hey a l so obse rve the g radua l accep tance o f em ergenc y p l ann ing ,m i t iga t ion , and m on i to r ing a s appropri a te t o t he t a sk o f en v i ronmen ta l impac tassessmen t .

As wi th t he scope o f t he p ro jec t s , ana lys t s obse rve tha t t he m e thods em ployedhave evo lved cons ide rab ly , f rom ana lys is o f secondary da t a sou rces t o t he ac -quis i t ion of pr imary data in speci f ic s i te s i tua t ions; f rom the use of speci f icimpact models (e .g . , migra t ion/ locat ion) to more e labora te in tegra t ive processmode l s wh ich de f ine " the b l ack box" (FERC 1987) ; f rom su rveys o f pub l i ca t t itudes to c i t izen-based tech nolog y assessments in wh ich the c i t izens them selvesdef ine the imp acts of a proposal (Carnes e t a l . 1983).

O f w ha t im por t ance was the ind iv idua l re sea rche r in t h i s evo lu t iona ry p rocess?The gene ra l v i ew which emerges f rom the in t e rv i ewees i s t ha t t he re sea rche rand h is in teres t s a re but one var iab le affec t ing the scope o f SIA a t the L abora tory .Most agree tha t a research ent repreneur can take advantage of a s i tua t ion andexplo i t a research task . Severa l of the in terv iewees sense tha t the i r par t icu larsk il ls i n p resen t ing a p rob lem a l lowed them the oppor tun i ty to " m arke t " an i s suebet ter than o thers . T hey a lso note tha t the va lues of the socia l analyst (som e o fwh ich der ive f ro m t ra in ing in speci f ic f ie lds) led them to focus o n the d is t r ibut ionof impac t s , t o be con ce rned wi th fa i rness , and u l t ima te ly to exp lo re mech an i smsfor publ ic par t ic ipa t ion in the asse ssm ent process .

At the same t ime, a l l o f the respondents see the i r ab i l i ty to inf luence theevo lu t ion o f S IA i s g rea t ly s t ruc tu red by two powerfu l fac to rs - - - the l aw andc i rcumstance . Fro m the l ega l pe rspec tive , t he recen t P AN E dec i s ion has l imi t edthe scope o f S IA by exc lud ing pe rce ived r isk , a s i t ua tion tha t mos t o f t he ana lys t sf ind unsat i sfac tory , but one wh ich neverthe less res tr ic ts the i r form al analysis aspub l i shed in t he EIS (e .g . , US Army 1988) . On the o the r hand , t he change inCE Q regu la tions wh ich ca l l ed fo r scop ing m ee t ings p r io r t o an a ssessm en t hascrea ted opportuni t ies for the analyst to negot ia te the agenda.

Ci rcum stances and serendip i tous events are a l so ver y im portant . W hat pro jec tsthe Lab ora to ry under takes , w ho the sponso rs a re , t he l eve l o f con t rove rsy sur -round ing the p ro j ec t s , t he ex t en t o f i nves tmen t i n t he p ro j ec t , t he amoun t o fmoney avai lab le for analysis , the expert i se and experience of the analysts as-s igned to t he p ro j ec t , and the po in t a t wh ich they have been b rough t i n on theprojec t a re a l l fac tors affec t ing the inf luence of the research er in se t t ing the socia limpac t agenda .


9/11

S E TT IN G T H E S O C I A L IM P A C T A G E N D A 77

M o r e i m p o r t a n t, a n d c o n s i s t e n t w i t h T a y l o r ' s ( 1 9 8 4 ) a n a l y s is o f t h e m u t u a ld e p e n d e n c e o f i n s i d e rs a n d o u t s i d e r s , t h e y n o t e th e e f f e c t s o f o u t s id e i n f l u e n c e so n t h e a l l o c a t i o n o f r e s o u r c e s a n d o n t h e a t t e n ti o n p a i d t o s p e c i fi c i s su e s . O n c ea n i s s u e i s r a is e d b y a n o u t s i d e g r o u p t h r o u g h t h e c o m m e n t o r h e a r in g s p r o c e s s ,o r i f th e p r o j e c t is c o n t r o v e r s i a l , th e n r e s o u r c e s a re m o r e g e n e r o u s l y d i r e c t e d t othe r e se a r c he r t o pur sue the i nve s t iga t ion .

F i n a l l y , a s o n e r e s p o n d e n t n o t e d , t h e p r o j e c t s t h e m s e l v e s s t r u c tu r e th e s c o p eo f t he a s se ssme n t . T he f a c t tha t " w e d on ' t de a l w i th i n f ra s t r uc tu r e i s sue s a sm u c h n o w a s b e f o r e is m a i n l y a f u n c t io n o f t h e n a t u re o f th e p r o j e c t s w e a rew o r k i n g o n . N u c l e a r r ea c t o r s h a v e m a j o r i n fr a s tr u c tu r e im p a c t s w h i l e l o w f l y i n ga i r c r a f t do no t . "

C o n c l u s i o n s a n d O b s e r v a t io n sT h e p a r t ic i p a n ts i n t h is s t u d y f it B e r g ' s p o r t r a y a l o f t h e " o b j e c t i v e " e x p e r t a s apo l i t i c a l a c to r . T he i r r e sponse s i nd i c a t e t ha t t he y a r e f a r f r om n e u t r a l pa r t ic ipa n t si n p o l i c y p r o c e s s . T h e y a r e n e i t h e r c a u t i o u s i n e x p r e s s i n g t h e i r v a l u e s n o r i n -se ns i t i ve t o t he f o r c e s o f i n f lue nc e a nd s t a tus w hic h e nha nc e o r de t r a c t f r omt h e i r a b i li ty t o d o t h e i r w o r k . T h e y a r e a w a r e o f , a n d r e s p o n s i v e t o , t h e d y n a m i c so f a n i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s i n w h i c h t h e y a r e b u t o n e s e t o f a c t o r s . W h i l et h e y p e r c e i v e t h a t t h e i r a b il it y t o c o n t r i b u t e to t h e o u t c o m e o f a n y a s s e s s m e n tp r o c e s s is m i n i m a l a n d s o m e t im e s d e p e n d e n t o n o u t si d e f o r c e s , t h e y h a v e m a n -a ge d to ga in c ons ide r a b le i n f lue nc e w i th in t he o r ga n iz a t iona l se t t i ng in w hic hthe y w or k . The y ha ve l e g i t ima te d the i r r e se a r c h in t e r e s t s a nd sk i l l s a nd in t u r nh a v e e n h a n c e d t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t a t u s , a p h e n o m e n o n o b -s e r v e d b y o t h e r s t u d e n t s o f t h e N E P A p r o c e s s ( C a l d w e l l 1 9 8 2 ; T a y l o r 1 9 8 4 ) .W i t h in t h e o r g a n i z a t io n , t h e y a r c t h e g r o u p w h i c h d e f i n e s t h e s c o p e o f th e s o c i ali m p a c t a g e n d a .

H o w e v e r , t h e o r g a n i z at i o n a l p o s i t io n o f t h e s o c ia l a n a ly s t a t O R N L is d i f f e re n tf r o m t h a t o f h i s c o u n t e r p a r t w h o w o r k s w i t h i n a m i s s i o n a g e n c y . I n o n e s e n s eh e i s a n o u t s i d e r to t h e b u r e a u c r a c y f o r w h o m h e i s p r o v i d i n g h is e x p e r t i s e . A tthe sa me t ime he ha s a n ins t i t u t i ona l i z e d r o l e t o p l a y in t he po l i c y p r oc e ss , ar o l e w hic h i s de f ine d a nd a u thor i z e d by a c on t r a c t . I n t h i s c a se , how e ve r , t hee f f e c t o f t he c on t r a c t r e l a t ionsh ip w a s t o se pa r a t e c l e a r ly the a n a lys t ' s i n t e r e s tf r om the i n t e r e s t o f t he a ge nc y . The c on t r a c t s e e ms to f unc t ion a s a ba r r i e r , ade f e n se a ga ins t t he po l i ti c a l p r e s sur e s o f t he a g e nc y .I t m i g h t b e a r g u e d t h a t th e L a b o r a t o r y p r o v i d e s a u n i q u e c a s e : t h a t c o n t r a c tr e l a t ions w i th p r iva t e r e se a r c h ins t i tu t i ons a r e d i f f e r e n t be c a u se t he j ob s a t O R N La r c no t a s d i r e c t ly t i e d t o t he f unds r e c e iv e d by the EIS c on t r a c t s . S uc h ap r o p o s i t i o n d e s e r v e s f u r t h e r a tt e n ti o n a n d c a n n o t b e a d d r e s s e d h e r e d i r e c t ly . A tt h e s a m e t i m e , f r o m t h e d e s c ri p t io n p r o v i d e d b y t h e a n a ly s t s o f th e p r o c e s s b yw h ic h S IA w a s l e g i t ima te d , i t i s c l e a r t ha t t he c u l tu r e o f t he L a bo r a to r y f os t e r e da n d s u p p o r t e d i n d e p e n d e n c e o f th e a n a l y s t f r o m t h e s p o n s o r a n d t h a t t h is c u l t u r e


10/11

78 LOIS MARTINBRONFMAN

w a s unde r s tood a nd t r a ns f e r r e d to t he a c t iv i t i e s o f soc i a l impa c t a s se ssme ntth r ough the e f f o r t s o f se ve r a l ke y o r ga n iz a t iona l e n t r e pr e ne ur s .

T h e r o l e o f t h e o r g a n i za t io n a l e n t r e p r e n e u r is r e c e i v i n g r e n e w e d a t te n t i o n a ss tude n ts f o c us o n suc h a c t iv i t ie s no t a t t he h ighe s t l e ve l s o f a dmin i s t r a t ion ( L e w is1 9 8 0 ) , b u t w i t h in t h e m i d d l e m a n a g e m e n t a n d s t a f f p o s i ti o n s . T h i s c a s e o f f e r e dse ve r a l i n t e r e s t i ng e xa mple s o f e n t r e pr e ne ur i a l a c t i v i t y : mos t s t r i k ing w a s thes e l f- c o n s c io u s e f f o r t o f E l i z a b e th P c e l l e t o p r o m o t e s o c i a l i m p a c t a s s e s s m e n tw i th in t he L a bor a to r y . As i s some t ime s the c a se , t hose a r ound he r f ound i td i f f ic u l t t o se pa r a t e i n spe c i fi c ins t a nc e s he r o w n in t e re s t f r om tha t o f t he b r o a de rin t e r e s t s o f t he o r ga n iz a t ion . The r e i s l i t t l e d i sa gr e e me nt , how e ve r , t ha t i n t hee a r l y d a y s o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l a s s e s s m e n t w o r k a t t h e L a b o r a t o r y , P e e l l e w a sr e spons ib l e f o r e s t a b l i sh ing a f oo tho ld f o r S IA a nd tha t she ha s e xe r t e d c ons id -e r a b l e i n f lue nc e in se t t i ng the soc i a l impa c t a s se ssme nt a ge nda w i th in t he L a b-or a to r y .

In t e r e s t i ng ly , t he e vo lu t ion o f sc ope o f soc i a l impa c t a s se ssme nt a t t he L a b-o r a t o r y h as f o r th e m o s t p a r t m i r r o r e d th e d e v e l o p m e n t o f th e f i e ld th r o u g h o u tthe U S ( F ins t e r busc h 1985) . I t w ould be f l a t t e r ing to t he a na lys t s t o a r gue tha tt h e ir i n fl u e n c e w a s f e l t f a r b e y o n d t h e c o n f in e s o f O R N L . C e r t a i n l y th e r e w a sa n d i s m u t u a l e x c h a n g e o f id e a s a n d i n f l u en c e . S u c h a c o n c l u s i o n o n l y s u p p o r t s ,h o w e v e r , t h e s t ro n g e r i n f lu e n c e o f f a c t o r s o u t si d e o f t h e c o n t r o l o f i n d i v id u a la na lys t s i n s t r uc tu r ing how a nd w ha t i s done a t a pa r t i c u l a r t ime .

ReferencesBerg, M. 1975. "The Poli tics o f Tec hno logy A ssessment ," Journal of the InternationalSociety for Technology Assessment. 1 : 2 3 - 3 2 .Caldwell , L. 1982. Science and the National Environmental Policy Act. Univers i ty ,Alabama: Univers i ty of Alabama Press .Cames , S . , Copenhaver , E . , Sorensen , J . , Soder t rom, E . , Reed , R . , Bjorns tad , D. , andPeelle, E. 1983. "Incen tives and Nu clear W aste Sit ing: Prosp ects and Con straints ."Energy Systems and Policy. 7 ( 4 ) : 2 3 2 - 3 5 1 .Environm ental L aw Institute: S.W . Futrell. NEPA in Action: Environmental Offices inNineteen Federal Agencies. W ashington, D .C. G overnm ent Pr inting O ff ice .Federal E nergy Regula tory Com miss ion (FER C), Off ice of H ydro pow er Licens ing. 1987.Final Environmental Impact Statement, Snohomish River Basin, Washington: SevenHydroelectric Projects. D ocket N o. E1 85-19-101. FE RC /EIS is-0042.Finsterbusch, K. 1985. "State o f the Art in Social Imp act A ssessm ent." Environment andBehavior 1 7 : 1 9 2 - 2 2 1 .Lewis , E . 1980. Public Entrepreneurship. Bloom ington: Indiana Univers i ty Press.Liroff , R. A. 1976. A National Policy for the Environment. Bloomington : Ind iana Uni -versity Press.Nelkin, D . 1984. "Wisdo m , Experti se , and Appl ica t ion of Ethics ," Science Technologyand Human Values" 6:16--17.


11/11

SETFINGTHE SOCIAL MPACTAGENDA 79

P e e l l e , E . 1 9 82 . S o c i o e c o n o m i c I m p a c t A s s e s s m e n t an d N u c l e a r P o w e r P l a n t L ic e n s i n g .G r e e n C o u n t y , N e w Y o r k . U n p u b l i s h e d p a p e r .P e t r ic h , C . 1 9 84 . " E I A S c o p i n g f o r A e s t h e t ic : H i n d s i g h t f r o m t h e G r e e n e C o u n t y N u c l e a rP o w e r P l a n t E I S . " I n Improving Imp act Assessment. p p . 5 8 - 9 3 . B o u l d e r , C O : W e s t -v iew P res s .Shrade r -F reche t te , K . S . 1985. Science Policy, Ethics and Economic Methodology. Dor-drech t , Hol land : Re ide l Publ i sh ing .Tay lor , S . 1984. Making Bureaucracies Think. Pa lo Al to , C A: S tanford Univ e rs i ty P res s .T e i c h , A . H . , a n d W . H . L a m h r i g h t. 1 9 7 5. Redeploying B ig Science: a Study of Diver-sification at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Syracuse , New York : Ins t i tu te fo r Publ icP o l i c y A l t e r n a ti v e s .U . S . A r m y , O f f ic e o f P r o g r a m M a n a g e r f o r C h e m i c a l D e m i l it a r iz a t io n . 1 9 88 . Chemical

Stockpile Disposal Program, Fin al Programm atic Environmental Impact Statement.

setting the social impact agenda

Documents