WSP01521 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

\)35~j two types of judgments. The first concerned the direction, positive or negative, of all of the impacts for each geographic region under each condition. The second step involved deter- mining the relative ~~~Q~~ud~ of the imp~ct (with three con- ditions and seven 0eographic areas there were 21 separate .. ratings in all). For example, in the case of the Hardin site, under the employment impact analysis. the flood pool would ". eliminate more than 200 jobs which could not be quickly replaced. Thus, the relative social impact on the lives of most of the p0uplc working in that area would be quite severe -- most of the present employment would disappear. Depending upon the direction and magnitude of the impact, one of five values '''as assigned: ++ positive Social Impact, relatively large + positive Social Impact, re la ti vely small 0 Neutral (consideration not affected in any way) Negative Social Impact, relatively small Negative Social Impact, relatively large The term "relative" is used to denote that the sizE' of the impact is considered in light of the proportion.of population (or insti- tutions) affected under a given circumstance. For example, in the Ilardin situation the employment impact is very large for '" !leudin. Contrawise, the same number of jObs lost in Denver would not constitute a severe impact because of the huge size of the .. labor force. Thus, the social impact ratings are always related to the geographic column under which they appear. It should be noted that the value of thi~ type of analysis is that it forces systematic evaluation of social impacts from 42