ABSTRACT
A review of the documents generated with regard to predicting the socioeconomic impacts of the trans Alaska oil pipeline suggests that several basic approaches were used to make assumptions. Local planners were not the only ones to use a combination of imagination and logic in developing assumptions. The Fairbanks experience suggests that the changes induced by the trans Alaska pipeline could not always be expressed in quantitative terms. In general, the oil industry in Fairbanks assumed the attitude that it was responsible for paying taxes, but had no further responsibility to mitigate pipeline project impacts. The responsibilities for addressing impacts of the trans Alaska oil pipeline on Fairbanks rested with the local community. It is possible that Fairbanks could have fared better during the pipeline period if better strategies had been planned. In the case of Fairbanks and the trans Alaska oil pipeline, the federal government played a minimal role in addressing impact situations.
