Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
environmental analysis for international projects, and now USAID requires
active and extensive public participation in almost every case. In their guid-
ance, they even acknowledge how public outreach as part of environmental
analysis can have benefits in the broader society: “Through this process [envi-
ronmental analysis], together we reinforce practical civil society and democ-
racy through transparency and public participation” (USAID 2005).
The benefits of public participation as an integral and important part of envi-
ronmental analysis are largely the same and stem from the same concepts as
full citizen participation in the governance of a democratic society. When infor-
mation, options, and the decision process are open and transparent, those in
a position to implement decisions are held accountable. Also when there is an
avenue for public input, a combination of wisdom, knowledge, and experience
from multiple sources is fully available and there is a strong potential for a bet-
ter product compared with a process held closely by a small group with similar
experiences and objectives. Of course the opposite is also true. If the process
is not open, the agenda of those in positions of influence and authority will
be addressed first and they will not be held accountable. Also, the concerns of
others and ideas for a superior action are never considered, much less incorpo-
rated, in the environmental impact analysis or implementation of the action.
In the early years of environmental impact analysis, public outreach was
figuratively and literally only an afterthought and was not an integrated
component of the process. In most cases public participation was largely
limited to a public meeting or hearing after the draft analysis document
was made public. The results of the analysis would be presented, and then
limited questions and comments would be received. However in the typical
case, the proponent of the proposed action with obvious biases presented
only the supporting and positive information that led to the selection of the
proposed action, thus limiting the range and scope of comments that the
public could contribute: if the public is not presented with the positive and
negative aspects of all options, their input is limited.
As discussed in the preceding section, public outreach at the initial stages
of the environmental impact analysis process, particularly during scoping,
has become the largest and most productive avenue for public input. The
public has the potential for influence while the paper is still blank and they
become a part of the process rather than an audience or often unwanted
appendage. The public outreach aspects of scoping are covered in detail in
Section 4.3 and are not repeated here. Other aspects are discussed under
separate headings.
4.4.1
Public Outreach Commitment and Extent of Involvement
A n ag reement by stakeholders to be a n act ive part of a n environ mental i impact
analysis represents a significant commitment of time and energy. Only in the
rarest of cases is there any monetary compensation for the commitment, thus
there must be some reason for stakeholders to volunteer their time and energy.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search