Social Impact Assessment (SIA) is the process of assessing the social consequences that are likely to follow specific policy actions or project development. SIA has not been widely adopted and is said to be the orphan of the assessment process. Using Environmental Assessment (EA) however, there are two primary limitations to EA: first, EA is inherently biased toward the biophysical environment, and social impacts, when considered, are only considered in an indirect or secondary manner; second, EA is targeted at the project level, where many alternatives that may have met the larger goals have been rejected. These limitations are reflected in Canadas agricultural sector where SIAs are rarely, if ever, undertaken. Agriculture is responsible for approximately ten percent of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Canada, and several better management practices (BMP) have been suggested for managing these emissions in Canadian agriculture. However, there has not been a strategic assessment of the on-farm socioeconomic effects of such programs, nor the geographic implications of a one-size-fits-all policy solution. <p>This paper presents a higher level strategic assessment of alternative policy options for managing greenhouse gas emissions in Canadian agriculture. Data are collected using a stakeholder survey assessment, and the process is guided by a seven-phase strategic environmental assessment framework. Using this strategic framework, the on-farm social impacts of alternative greenhouse gas mitigation programs are assessed. Data are aggregated using multi-criteria weighting techniques. Stakeholder preference structures for the alternatives set are identified as well, the results of the SIA identified adoption of zero till practices as the most socially acceptable alternative. The research results suggest that a one-size-fits-all GHG mitigation policy would not be acceptable from a social perspective. The implications of include such issues as: the applicability of regional policies based on soil zone, alternatives to governmental top down hierarchical policies, and the necessity for collaboration and meaningful dialogue between on-farm individuals and policy makers. Adoption of a GHG mitigation policy in Canada will require education and collaboration between all affected stakeholders and decision makers. The application of a strategic framework illustrates how the SIA process is enhanced when an assessment is completed at the plan, policy, and program level it enables proactive consideration of the social effects on par with the biophysical effects, and it facilitates consideration of a broad range of alternatives, in support of sustainable development principles.

Social Impact Assessment (SIA) is the process of assessing the social consequences that are likely to follow specific policy actions or project development. SIA has not been widely adopted and is said to be the orphan of the assessment process. Using Environmental Assessment (EA) however, there are two primary limitations to EA: first, EA is inherently biased toward the biophysical environment, and social impacts, when considered, are only considered in an indirect or secondary manner; second, EA is targeted at the project level, where many alternatives that may have met the larger goals have been rejected. These limitations are reflected in Canadas agricultural sector where SIAs are rarely, if ever, undertaken. Agriculture is responsible for approximately ten percent of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Canada, and several better management practices (BMP) have been suggested for managing these emissions in Canadian agriculture. However, there has not been a strategic assessment of the on-farm socioeconomic effects of such programs, nor the geographic implications of a one-size-fits-all policy solution. <p>This paper presents a higher level strategic assessment of alternative policy options for managing greenhouse gas emissions in Canadian agriculture. Data are collected using a stakeholder survey assessment, and the process is guided by a seven-phase strategic environmental assessment framework. Using this strategic framework, the on-farm social impacts of alternative greenhouse gas mitigation programs are assessed. Data are aggregated using multi-criteria weighting techniques. Stakeholder preference structures for the alternatives set are identified as well, the results of the SIA identified adoption of zero till practices as the most socially acceptable alternative. The research results suggest that a one-size-fits-all GHG mitigation policy would not be acceptable from a social perspective. The implications of include such issues as: the applicability of regional policies based on soil zone, alternatives to governmental top down hierarchical policies, and the necessity for collaboration and meaningful dialogue between on-farm individuals and policy makers. Adoption of a GHG mitigation policy in Canada will require education and collaboration between all affected stakeholders and decision makers. The application of a strategic framework illustrates how the SIA process is enhanced when an assessment is completed at the plan, policy, and program level it enables proactive consideration of the social effects on par with the biophysical effects, and it facilitates consideration of a broad range of alternatives, in support of sustainable development principles.

On January 31, 1911, the Homemakers' Clubs of Saskatchewan became an official organisation under the direction of the University of Saskatchewan. Established to provide isolated rural women with companionship, access to education, and the opportunity to carry out community service, Homemakers' Clubs appealed to thousands of farm women because they provided the means by which they could improve themselves, their farm homes, and their communities. Its appeal also lay in the fact that the organisation remained non-political and non-sectarian, focusing instead on women's primary responsibilities to their homes and their families. To that end, Homemakers' Clubs embraced a domestic ideology that institionalised notions of gender and celebrated women's roles in the home. Given that the nature of farm women's work was not restricted to the household, however, Homemakers' Clubs allowed rural women to redefine an urban domesticity to include their farming responsibilities. Moreover, in a setting where gender lines were often blurred and the division of labour was not always strictly defined, membership in an organisation that reinforced gender roles, promoted family and community life, and embraced a traditional mandate provided farm women with a level of respectability and femininity that was often lost in a farming setting. Finally, the domestic ideology under which the Homemakers' Clubs operated allowed its members to find recognition and validation in their work, and, in their goals to elevate home life, to legitimise their work, and to adjust domestic ideology to include their farming responsibilities, the organisation became a space in which its members discussed, debated, explored, and, in some cases, challenged common perceptions of women; they subtly challenged the status quo and demanded validation and recognition for their work in and contributions to their farms and communities. As such, an organisation that may outwardly appear to be a traditional women's organisation devoted strictly to the exchange of recipes and household advice, was, in actuality, quietly political and provided farm women with a sense of identity that enabled them to contribute fundamentally to their rural homes, families, and communities.

On January 31, 1911, the Homemakers' Clubs of Saskatchewan became an official organisation under the direction of the University of Saskatchewan. Established to provide isolated rural women with companionship, access to education, and the opportunity to carry out community service, Homemakers' Clubs appealed to thousands of farm women because they provided the means by which they could improve themselves, their farm homes, and their communities. Its appeal also lay in the fact that the organisation remained non-political and non-sectarian, focusing instead on women's primary responsibilities to their homes and their families. To that end, Homemakers' Clubs embraced a domestic ideology that institionalised notions of gender and celebrated women's roles in the home. Given that the nature of farm women's work was not restricted to the household, however, Homemakers' Clubs allowed rural women to redefine an urban domesticity to include their farming responsibilities. Moreover, in a setting where gender lines were often blurred and the division of labour was not always strictly defined, membership in an organisation that reinforced gender roles, promoted family and community life, and embraced a traditional mandate provided farm women with a level of respectability and femininity that was often lost in a farming setting. Finally, the domestic ideology under which the Homemakers' Clubs operated allowed its members to find recognition and validation in their work, and, in their goals to elevate home life, to legitimise their work, and to adjust domestic ideology to include their farming responsibilities, the organisation became a space in which its members discussed, debated, explored, and, in some cases, challenged common perceptions of women; they subtly challenged the status quo and demanded validation and recognition for their work in and contributions to their farms and communities. As such, an organisation that may outwardly appear to be a traditional women's organisation devoted strictly to the exchange of recipes and household advice, was, in actuality, quietly political and provided farm women with a sense of identity that enabled them to contribute fundamentally to their rural homes, families, and communities.