Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
public's views before presenting their applications for authorization and EISs. Few
competent authorities have the time or resources to gauge public opinion adequately
before making their decisions. Few EISs are truly well presented.
This chapter discusses how consultation and participation of both the public (Section
6.2) and designated environmental consultees (Section 6.3) can be fostered, and how the
results can be used to improve a proposed project and speed up its authorization process.
The effective presentation of the EIS is then discussed in Section 6.4. The review of EISs
and assessment of their accuracy and comprehensiveness are considered in Section 6.5.
The chapter concludes with a discussion about decision-making and post-decision legal
challenges.
6.2 Public consultation and participation
This section discusses how “best practice” public participation 1 can be encouraged. It
begins by considering the advantages and disadvantages of public participation. It then
establishes requirements for effective public participation and reviews methods of such
participation. Finally, we discuss the UK approach to public participation. The reader is
also referred to the Audit Commission (2000), Canter (1996), IEMA (2002) and Weston
(1997) for further information on public participation.
6.2.1 Advantages and disadvantages of public participation
Developers do not usually favour public participation. It may upset a good relationship
with the LPA. It carries the risk of giving a project a high profile, with attendant costs in
time and money. It may not lead to a conclusive decision on a project, as diverse interest
groups have different concerns and priorities; the decision may also represent the views
of the most vocal interest groups rather than of the general public. Most developers'
contact with the public comes only at the stage of planning appeals and inquiries; by this
time, participation has often evolved into a systematic attempt to stop their projects.
Thus, many developers never see the positive side of public participation because they do
not give it a chance.
Historically, public participation has also had connotations of extremism,
confrontation, delays and blocked development. In the USA, NEPA-related lawsuits have
stopped major development projects, including oil and gas developments in Wyoming, a
ski resort in California and clear-cut logging project in Alaska (Turner 1988). In Japan in
the late 1960s and early 1970s, riots (so violent that six people died) delayed the
construction of the Narita Airport near Tokyo by 5 years. In the UK, perhaps the most
visible forms of public participation have been protesters wearing gas masks at nuclear
power station sites, threatening to lie down in front of the bulldozers working on the M3
motorway at Twyford Down and being forcibly evicted from tunnels and tree houses on
the Newbury bypass route, which cost more than £6 million for policing before
construction even began. More typically, all planners are familiar with acrimonious
public meetings and “ban the project” campaigns. Public participation may provide the
legal means for intentionally obstructing development; the protracted delay of a project
can be an effective method of defeating it.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search