Comparison Between Simea and Seneca Methods for Social Impact Analysis of Energy Systems

  • F. Orecchini
  • A. Micangeli
  • I. Pollini
  • A. Santiangeli
  • L. Del Campo
  • F. Zuccari


The SIMEA (Social Impact Method of Energy Analysis) and SENECA (Social and ENErgetic Change Analysis) are new methodologies to evaluate social impact, considering as environment not only the natural world, but also the economy structure, social organisation end cultural and historical aspects of a site. The aim of SIMEA is to consider in integrated way most of the possible effects on the environment (considering the definition of enlarged environment: nature, economy etc.) of the energy system and evaluate the social consequences on site where the energy system is installed of this effects as social impact. The SENECA method aims at evaluating the social change coming out from different energy choices within energy development projects in small rural communities. Through this method is possible to describe both an implemented and an implementing project using some indicators and a correlation, giving justification of the appropriate use of the chosen function. Aiming at the common scope of Social impact evaluation of energy systems, SIMEA and SENECA will use parameters that are chosen in different ways. In both cases the site is analysed from a social point of view starting from energetic changes. The surrounding areas are considered in different ways. For SIMEA it is only considered as parameter for the comparison to evaluate the local situation. SENECA method is based on a gravitational model, so that the surrounding areas are the gravitational field itself, and the migration flux, or the repulsive force, are based also on it.


Energy System Social Impact Social Indicator Environmental Indicator Impact Evaluation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bisset R. L’Impatto Socioeconomico delle Centrali Elettriche: l’Esperienza del Regno Unito. Roma RTI/STUDI — VASA 1985.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gilmore R.S., Robinson E. La Valutazione degli Effetti Socioeconomici Associati ai Progetti di Centrali Elettriche negli Stati Uniti d’America. Roma RTI/STUDI- VASA 1985.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Naso V., Orecchini F., Zuccari F. SIMEA: Social Impact Method of Energy Analysis. Proceeding of the Thermodynamic Analysis and Improvement of Energy Systems, Bejing, 1997.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sartori S. Una Rassegna Critica delle Metodologie di Analisi e Valutazione dell’Impatto Socioeconomico dei Sistemi Energetici in USA. Roma RTI/STUDI-VALSAMB, 1983.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zeppetella A., Bresso M., Gamba G. Valutazione Ambientale e Processi di Decisione. Roma 1993.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hohmeyer O. Social Costs of Energy Consumption - External Effects of Electricity Generation in the Federal Republic of Germany. Berlin, Springer-Verlag 1988.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Capata R,, Naso V., Orecchini F. Social Impact of Energy Systems. Proceeding World Renewable Energy Congress IV, CO, Elsevier Science. Denver 1996.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Capitani G. Analisi dei Sistemi — Modelli Matematici. Bologna, Progetto Leonardo, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stillwell J., Congdon P. Migration Models — Macro and Micro Approaches. London, Belhaven Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bacci, M.L. Introduzione alia Demografla. Torino, Loescher, 1990.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zachariah K.C., Condé J. Migration in West Africa — Demographic Aspects. Washington D.C., Oxford 1981.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Touré M., Fadayami T.O. Migrations et Urbanisation au Sud du Sahara Dakar, Codesria, 1993.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kuper H. Urbanization and Migration in West Africa. Westport, Greenwood Press, 1977.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ponting C. Storia Verde del Mondo. Torino, SEI 1992.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cornia G.A., Von der Hoeven R., Mkanndwire T. L’Afrique vers la Reprise Economique. Paris, Economica 1992.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hardoy G.E. The Urban Child in the Third World: Urbanization Trends and some Principal Issues. Firenze Innocenti Occasional Papers per UNICEF, 1992.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Antoine P., Bocquier P., Fall A.S., Guisse Y.M., Nanitelamio J. Les Families Dakaroises face à la Crise. Dakar, IFAN — ORSTOM — CEPED, 1995.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zajczyk P. World of Social Indicators. 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Orecchini
    • 1
  • A. Micangeli
    • 1
  • I. Pollini
    • 1
  • A. Santiangeli
    • 1
  • L. Del Campo
    • 1
  • F. Zuccari
    • 1
  1. 1.CIRPS - University of Rome “La Sapienza”RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations