manual for social impact assessment of land-based ... - Forest Trends

A large sample is needed to be confident of the tally method. An advantage of the tally methods is
that by not listing or pre-defining the potential factors, there is little risk of influencing people’s
responses; there may however be a bias towards them mentioning project-related factors, especially
if they know the study is being carried out to analyze project impacts, and important non-project
factors could be omitted. As with all participatory methods, great care is needed to avoid bias. Given
the danger that respondents are more likely to cite project-related factors if someone from the
project undertakes the survey, it would be better to get an independent group to do it, e.g., a local
NGO unconnected to the project.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Participatory Impact Assessment
Main Advantages or Benefits Main Disadvantages or Limitations
• PIA methods can be designed with an explicit
attribution focus
• With 10-15 repetitions with different focus
groups and systematic use of the methods,
basic statistical analysis is possible
• Any level of ‘differentiation’ is possible, e.g.,
analysis of wealth, gender and ethnic factors
• Participatory and low cost approach using
locally defined indicators
• Flexible and adaptable – can be combined with
other methods
Main Source and Further Guidance
• Methodology needs to be adapted to each
locality and may require a relatively long
planning process
• Possible vulnerability to bias (e.g., strategic
responses; project factors more likely to be
mentioned in ‘tally tables’)
• Quite demanding of community time
• Variable levels of rigor and reliability
• Some methods are time consuming, e.g., pairwise
or matrix ranking
Catley, A., Burns, J., Abebe, D. and Suji, O. 2008. Participatory Impact Assessment. A Guide for
Practitioners. Feinstein International Center, Tufts University. Available at:
http://wikis.uit.tufts.edu/confluence/display/FIC/Participatory+Impact+Assessment (also
available in Spanish and French).
Social Impact Assessment of Land-Based Carbon Projects (1.0) – Part II | 56