Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
On the other hand, public participation can be used positively to convey information
about a development, clear up misunderstandings, allow a better understanding of
relevant issues and how they will be dealt with, and identify and deal with areas of
controversy while a project is still in its early planning phases. The process of
considering and responding to the unique contributions of local people or special interest
groups may suggest measures the developer could take to avoid local opposition and
environmental problems. These measures are likely to be more innovative, viable and
publicly acceptable than those proposed solely by the developer. Project modifications
made early in the planning process, before plans have been fully developed, are more
easily and cheaply accommodated than those made later. Projects that do not have to go
to inquiry are considerably cheaper than those that do. Early public participation also
prevents an escalation of frustration and anger, so it helps to avoid the possibility of more
forceful “participation”. The implementation of a project generally proceeds more
cheaply and smoothly if local residents agree with the proposal, with fewer protests, a
more willing labour force, and fewer complaints about impacts such as noise and traffic.
Research by Morrison-Saunders et al. (2001) also suggests that public pressure is a key
incentive to developers to prepare good EISs.
Past experience shows that the total benefits of openness can exceed its costs, despite
the expenditure and delays associated with full-scale public participation in the project
planning process. The case of British Gas has already been noted (House of Lords 1981).
Similarly, the conservation manager of Europe's (then) largest zinc/ lead mine noted that:
properly defined and widely used, [EIA is] an advantage rather than a
deterrent. It is a mechanism for ensuring the early and orderly
consideration of all relevant issues and for the involvement of affected
communities. It is in this last area that its true benefit lies. We have
entered an era when the people decide. It is therefore in the interests of
developers to ensure that they, the people, are equipped to do so with the
confidence that their concern is recognized and their future life-style
protected. (Dallas 1984)
Similarly, the developers of a motor-racing circuit noted:
The [EIS] was the single most significant factor in convincing local
members, residents and interested parties that measures designed to
reduce existing environmental impacts of motor racing had been
uppermost in the formulation of the new proposals. The extensive
environmental studies which formed the basis of the statement proved to
be a robust defence against the claims from objectors and provided
reassurance to independent bodies such as the Country-side Commission
and the Department of the Environment. Had this not been the case, the
project would undoubtedly have needed to be considered at a public
inquiry. (Hancock 1992)
6.2.2
Requirements for effective participation
Search WWH ::
Custom Search