Assessing The Social Impact Of Iskandar Malaysia

Development

Background of Study• Iskandar Malaysia has brought in a total new investments for the year

2014 at RM14.56 billion, as a corridor that is growing as rapidly as this, the social aspect around the development area is vital to support the sustainability and prosperity of the development (Roseland, 2000)• It is important to get the development to be socially prolific for it to be

the growth driver for Johor• Social factors are important to be studied because according to Esteves

& Vanclay (2009) the study of social impact is one way to find out what actually happens to people due to development, and to become aware of needs and changes that require attention of the policymakers

• Increased impacts lead many people to reconsider their opinions, leading to considerable anxiety at a local level (Voort & Vanclay, 2015), which is useful for the people of Iskandar Malaysia to be a part of this study as it helps them to be aware of the current situation of their communities.• Since Iskandar Malaysia’s launch in 2006, there are 4 phases in the total

projected 20 years development; being in the 2nd phase (2011 to 2015) now, Iskandar Malaysia has progressed rapidly, with several key developments completed and many more nearing completion (IRDA, 2011). • Interested members of the public, such as decision-makers and developers,

want to know what happens to people due to development (Potter et al., 2008).

Problem Statement• With these large amounts of capital that has been invested and causing Iskandar Malaysia

landscape changed tremendously in three keys area which are social, economic and environment and these need to be balanced it is important for a sustainable future

• Two main pillars of Iskandar Malaysia's economy are services and manufacturing, where services sector contribute about MYR 36.34 billion (35 %); the services sector are: Wholesale & Retail trade (42.2%), Tourism (16.8%), Professional & Business (14.6%), Transport & Related (12.7%), Medical & Educational (6.7%), Financial (6.6%).

• From an economics point of view, the initiative of development is to improve the well-being of people. However, development does not promise improvement or changes (Barrow, 2010), this statement is supported by Cowen & Shenton (1996) which commented that though the intention of development is to look forward to a positive outcome, it does not happen in that way all the time

• Setbacks or catastrophic failures might happen, and it might worsen the quality of life of individuals and communities affected by development (Chambers, 2005; Stern et al., 2005).

• In much of the debate about the effects of economic development, social impacts on the communities livelihoods becomes the topic of concern (Ravallion & Walle, 2008; Turner, 2004). • It is therefore essential to decision-makers to know what kind of social impact

might happen as a consequence of development, and which kinds of developments are positive or negative, intended or unintended and direct or indirect for different individuals or social institutions (Potter et al., 2008; Walker, 2010). • A lot of the times, community expectations and demands are not met when a

certain area is developed because of many ill-prepared developments which is due to the absence of governance work in managing social impacts (Esteves et al., 2012; Everingham, 2012; Ivanova et al., 2007; Kemp, 2011; Lockie et al., 2008; Rolfe et al., 2007; Solomon et al., 2008).

• Iskandar Malaysia is an important area to study, as Malaysia aims to attain a developed nation status by achieving a self-sufficient industrialized nation under the vision 2020 and this will help to achieve that

• Being in Malaysia, globalisation is achieved through top-down national policies (Rizzo & Glasson, 2011; Bunnel, 2002)

• As a growth driver in Johor, Iskandar Malaysia has a wide variety of developments that would enable it to sustain it economically and even though the economic side is maintained by the steady flow of investment towards the region but the social and the environment aspects have also to be balanced in ensuring a sustainable development

• Social aspect is commonly assessed through social impact study known as Social impact Assessment (SIA) which finds out what actually happens to people due to these developments, and also to become aware of needs and changes that require attention (Esteves & Vanclay, 2009)

• The study can help decision-makers to design better development strategies for attaining desirable outcomes, avoid repeating mistakes, and minimizing negative impacts (Burdge, 1995; Gârboan, 2005; Potter et al., 2008).

• There are several studies on Iskandar Malaysia such as Rizzo & Glasson (2012), Ho, Matsuoka, Simson & Gomi (2013), Rabe, Osman & Bachok (2014) and Osman, Bachok & Rabe (2015) but predominantly these studies only focuses on the economic side of Iskandar Malaysia while forgetting its social aspect• Until now, no study regarding social aspects of Iskandar Malaysia has been

reported so this study will attempt to investigate the social changes that have been brought out by economic components of Iskandar Malaysia • Seven social change processes proposed by Vanclay (2002) will be adapted in this

study• This study will explore each of the processes through questionnaire survey to

analyse which of the processes are dominantly affecting the social changes in the selected area of the study.

Research Questions + Objectivesa) What planned intervention is the most dominant in Iskandar Malaysia

b) What dimensions of social change processes plays the critical role in facilitating changes in Iskandar Malaysia

c) What are the drivers of social change in Iskandar Malaysia

d) What type of social impacts are apparent in Iskandar Malaysia

• The primary goal of this research is to this research aims to assess the social impact in Iskandar Malaysia. To achieve that, these set of objectives is necessary to be achieved:

a) To identify the most dominant planned intervention in Iskandar Malaysiab) To evaluate most dominant social change processes of Iskandar Malaysiac) To assess the social impact of Iskandar Malaysia planned intervention

Social Change• Social change is the transformation of culture and social organisation/structure over time and we are aware

that society is never static, and that social, political, economic and cultural changes occur constantly.

• There are four main characteristics of social change according to Macionis, 1996:• Social change happens everywhere, but the rate of change varies from place to place• Secondly, Social change is sometimes intentional but often unplanned. • Thirdly, social change often generates controversy.

• So what causes social change? Throughout the years of discussions on social changes, there are various causes of social change. Some of the causes are culture is a system that constantly loses and gains components. There are three main sources of cultural change.

• The first source is invention. Inventions produce new products, ideas, and social patterns. The invention of rocket propulsion led to space travel, which in the future may lead to inhabitation of other planets.

• The second source is discovery, which is finding something that has never been found before, or finding something new in something that already exists.

• The third source is diffusion which is the spreading of ideas and objects to other societies. This would involve trading, migration, and mass communication.

The Idea of Social Change

Social Change Processes (SCP)• It is impossible to identify all social change processes that could occur in any given project or amongst a range of

projects and to particularly identify all the background social change processes that are taking place in society. • While there are many social change processes, part of the problem of identification is also a lack of clarity about

what exactly constitutes a social change process, and the level of detail at which these processes should be specified. Below are some examples of the social change processes that are important in SIA.

• This list is not complete, it is simply an indicative list of examples of social change processes. It is likely, however, that the categorisation of social change processes into a number of groupings of social change processes is appropriate and likely to be robust across a range of situations.

• The social change processes are likely to comprise the following groupings:1. Demographic processes (changes in the number and composition of people); 2. Economic processes (relating to the way in which people make a living and economic activity in the society); 3. Geographical processes (changes in land use patterns); 4. Institutional and legal processes (relating to the efficiency and effective- ness of institutional structures including government

and nongovernment organisations); 5. Emancipatory and empowerment processes (increasing influence in decision making processes); 6. Sociocultural processes (affecting the culture of a society); and 7. Other processes.

Demographic processes1. In-migration.2. Out-migration.3. Presence of newcomers.4. Presence of (temporary) construction workers.5. Presence of seasonal residents.6. Presence of weekenders.7. Presence of tourists and day-trippers.8. Resettlement9. Displacement and dispossession10. Rural-to-urban migration.11. Urban-to-rural migration.

Economic processes1. Conversion and diversification of economic activities.2. Impoverishment3. Inflation4. Currency exchange fluctuation (devaluation).5. Concentration of economic activity6. Economic globalisation

Geographical processes1. Conversion and diversification of land use. 2. Urban sprawl 3. Urbanisation 4. Gentrification5. Enhanced transportation and rural accessibility6. Physical splintering

Institutional and legal processes1. Institutional globalisation and centralisation. 2. Decentralisation. 3. Privatisation

Emancipatory and empowerment processes1. Democratisation 2. Marginalisation and exclusion 3. Capacity building

Sociocultural processes1. Segregation 2. Social disintegration 3. Cultural differentiation

Other Processes• The list of social change process given above is not intended to be complete and, in fact, it is argued that no list could ever

be complete.

• New technologies and new social phenomenon continuously occur, and it is impossible to predict them and their likely social influence.

• For example, 20 years ago (and maybe even 10 years ago), who could have predicted the social impact of the Internet? It is always important to be aware that new processes are always potentially arising and that SIA theory and practice must never become stagnant.

• It is also clear that processes are not uniquely definable, conceptually clear, or mutually exclusive phenomena.

• They are theoretical constructions that provide explanation for what the observer is seeking to describe or explain. Thus, the types of processes identified by a particular theorist is linked to the purposes, objectives, and interests of the observer.

• There are different levels at which social processes can be described.

• Some social processes are macroprocesses that entail many other processes. For example, in the SIA literature, there is often discussion of normalisation (see inter alia Brealey et al., 1988)—the process by which boomtowns become normalised communities.

• This is, in fact, a complex process that involves many subordinate changes, including demographic changes, economic changes, geographical changes, institutional and legal changes, sociocultural changes, and quite possibly emancipatory changes as well.

Social Impact• Armour (1990):

• People’s way of life—how they live, work, play, and interact with one another on a day-to-day basis;• Their culture—shared beliefs, customs, and values;• Their community—its cohesion, stability, character, services, and facilities.

• Vanclay (1999), expanding Armour’s list, has identified the following as important:• People’s way of life—that is, how they live, work, play, and interact with one another on a day-to-day basis; • Their culture—that is, their shared beliefs, customs, values, and language or dialect; • Their community—its cohesion, stability, character, services, and facilities; • Their political systems—the extent to which people are able to participate in decisions that affect their lives, the level of

democratisation that is taking place, and the resources provided for this purpose; • Their environment—the quality of the air and water that people use; the availability and quality of the food that they eat; the level

of hazard or risk, dust, and noise in which they are exposed to; the adequacy of sanitation, their physical safety, and their access to and control over resources;

• Their health and well-being—where ‘health’ is understood in a manner similar to the World Health Organisation definition: ‘‘a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, not merely the absence of disease or infirmity’’;

• Their personal and property rights—particularly whether people are economically affected, or experience personal disadvantage, which may include a violation of their civil liberties; and

• Their fears and aspirations—their perceptions about their safety, their fears about the future of their community, and their aspirations for their future and the future of their children.

Social Impact Variables and Concepts• Social change processes need to be differentiated from social impacts that are experienced or felt in corporeal or perceptual terms. • The SIA literature has confused impacts and social change processes. • It should be noted very strongly that this is not a checklist of possible impacts of any particular project, nor is it a list of variables or indicators. • As repeatedly indicated, checklist thinking does not encourage the analytical thinking about the impact causing mechanisms that lead to

impacts, especially the second- and higher-order impacts, and the indirect impacts. • The variables that are important must be locally defined, and there may be local considerations that a generic listing does not adequately

represent. • The concepts that are presented are dimensions of the individual, family, community, and societal experience of social impacts and vary in

their specificity. Some are macroconcepts that may be difficult to measure, while others may lend themselves to operational definition, variable creation, and measurement easily. For the purposes of this paper, however, the intention was only to expand or broaden the understanding of social impacts.

• Social impacts must be experienced or felt. To be true to the broad definition of SIA used (i.e. Vanclay’s, 2002 definition), the list of impacts must potentially be capable of addressing positive benefits, as well as negative ones. In addition, because social impacts (that is, all impacts on humans) cover a wide variety of issues, the list must be broad. Some impacts are experienced at the level of an individual, other impacts are experienced at the level of a family or household unit, and other impacts are experienced by social organisations, institutions, or a community or society as a whole.

• Some impacts are corporeal—that is, felt by the body as physical reality other impacts are perceptual or emotional. Some macrolevel impacts are quite removed from individuals but nonetheless are important social impacts.

• The conceptualisation of social impacts has been divided into seven categories. The categorisation is intended to provide a general grouping to assist in thinking about the range of impacts. It is accepted that others may well group impacts in different ways.

Indicative health and social well being impacts

Indicative quality of the living environment (liveability) impacts

Indicative economic impacts and material well being impacts

Indicative cultural impacts

Indicative institutional, legal, political and equity impacts

Indicative family and community impacts

Indicative gender relations impact

Social Impact Assessment (SIA)• Social Impact Assessment (SIA) does not have any clear definition (Brouwer & Ek,

2004). • Vanclay (2002, p. 388), defines SIA in the following manner:• “Social impact assessment is the process of analysing (predicting, evaluating

and reflecting)and managing the intended and unintended consequences on the human environment of planned interventions (policies, programs, plans, projects) and any social change processes invoked by those interventions so as to bring about a more sustainable and equitable biophysical and human environment.”• Goodland (2000, p. 12) writes:• “SIA is more than a technique or step, rather, it is a philosophy about

development and democracy. As such, ideally it considers pathologies of development (i.e. harmful impacts), goals of development (such as poverty alleviation), and processes of development (e.g. participation, capacity building).”

SIA Model

Integrated framework for environmental and social impact assessment.

Theoretical Framework

Planned Intervention Social Change Processes

Social Impacts (=ve/-ve) (direct/indirect)

(planned/unplanned)

Social Impact Assessment (SIA)

Research Methodology• Phase 1: Identify Planned Intervention• Phase 2: Explore Social Change Processes• Phase 3: Determining Social Impact• Phase 4: Predict Connections between Planned Intervention, Social

Change Processes & Social Impacts• Phase 5: Predict Change Impacts On People And Community