Ethical implications of democratic theory for US public participation in environmental impact assessment (original) (raw)
Related papers
Challenges, 2018
The United States (US) occupies the frontline of events in the modern history of environmental reform. The federal government through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1970 has not only established an environmental policy template for other nations to emulate but has also produced a viable tool for regulating environmental quality(EQ)and delivering environmental justice (EJ)—Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). However, environmental history provides evidence that political processes and special interests govern the attainment of the EJ goal by way of inadequate adherence to the NEPA provisions. Public participation (PP) is a principal requirement for achieving EJ and constitutes a pivotal determinant of EIA outcome. Effective delivery of EJ through EIA does require complete compliance with NEPA stipulations. Furthermore, the responsible agency’s resources in terms of both funding and commitment in allowing for the full representation of the opinions of residents within communities of concern (CoC) for the environmental decision-making process are critically important. Public health research approach offers valuable tools towards achieving EJ goals. To approach this topic, first I provide historical background on EIA and EJ from the standpoint of the NEPA. Second, I discuss the meaning and impediments of PP. Third, I examine two scenarios viz the Triassic Park Hazardous Waste Dump in Roswell, and the public hearing of the recent “controversial” oil and gas ordinance in Sandoval County, both in New Mexico. Finally, in the discussion part, I attempt to evaluate PP in both cases and suggest that none of the criteria seem to have been met in either case. I conclude that the Home State Rule designation of New Mexico State in terms of control over oil and gas activities places it at an advantage in benefitting from a fair PP.
Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessment-Legal Framework
International Journal of Research -GRANTHAALAYAH, 2017
Development is a continuous process and is essential to enable the population to attain a better standard of life. But it should not be at the cost of the environment. The challenge of a development pattern striving to harmonize economics with social and environmental need requires active citizen participation in public issues. Involvement of the public is one of the fundamental principles of a successful EIA process. It not only provides an opportunity to those directly affected by a project to express their views on the environmental and social impacts of the proposal but also brings about transparency in the environmental clearance system. This paper focuses on public participation in EIA and its legal frame work.
The United States (US) occupies the frontline of events in modern history of environmental reform. The federal government through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1970 has not only established an environmental policy template for other nations to emulate, but has also produced a viable tool for regulating environmental quality (EQ) and delivering environmental justice (EJ)-Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). However, environmental history provides evidence that political process and special interests govern the attainment of the EJ goal by way of inadequate adherence to the NEPA provisions. Public participation (PP) is a principal requirement for achieving EJ and constitutes a pivotal determinant of EIA outcome. Effective delivery of EJ through EIA does require complete compliance with NEPA stipulations. Furthermore, the responsible agency's resources in terms of both funding and commitment in allowing for the full representation of the opinions of residents within communities of concern (CoC) for environmental decision-making process are critically important. Public health research approach offers valuable tools towards achieving EJ goals. To approach this topic, first I provide a historical background on EIA and EJ from the standpoint of the NEPA. Second, I discuss the meaning and impediments of PP. Third, I examine two scenarios viz the Triassic Park Hazardous Waste Dump in Roswell, and the public hearing of the recent "controversial" oil and gas ordinance in Sandoval County, both in New Mexico. Finally, in the discussion part, I attempt to evaluate PP in both cases and suggest that none of the criteria seem to have been met in either case. I conclude that the Home State Rule designation of New Mexico State in terms of control over oil and gas activities places it at an advantage in benefitting from a fair PP.
Policy Studies Journal, 2006
Knowing how people think about public participation processes and knowing what people want from these processes is essential to crafting a legitimate and effective process and delivering a program that is widely viewed as meaningful and successful. This article reports on research to investigate the nature of diversity among participants' perceptions of what is the most appropriate public participation process for environmental assessment and decision making in 10 different cases. Results show that there are clearly distinct perspectives on what an appropriate public participation process should be. We identified four perspectives: Science-Centered Stakeholder Consultation, Egalitarian Deliberation, Efficient Cooperation, and Informed Collaboration. The literature on public participation tends to presume that there are clear and universal criteria on how to “do” public participation correctly or that context is the critical factor. This study has revealed that even within a specific assessment or decision-making effort, there may be different perspectives about what is viewed as appropriate, which poses a challenge for both theorists and practitioners. Among the active participants in these 10 case studies, we found limited agreement and strong differences of opinions for what is a good process. Points of consensus across these cases are that good processes reach out to all stakeholders, share information openly and readily, engage people in meaningful interaction, and attempt to satisfy multiple interest positions. Differences appeared about how strongly to emphasize science and information, how much leadership and direction the process needs, what is the proper behavior of participants, how to tackle issues of power and trust, and what are the outcome-related goals of the process. These results challenge researchers and practitioners to consider the diversity of participant needs in addition to the broad context when conceptualizing or carrying out participatory processes.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS AND CASE STUDIES Sometimes Less Is Better: Ethics of Public Participation
Most discussions of ethics in public participation emphasize the agency's obligation to engage in more public participation. Yet, ethically speaking, sometimes less is better. If the increased public participation lacks forethought and proper support, it may do serious harm. We analyze three types of ethical breach that may occur when an agency engages in robust public participation: uncomplicated lying or manipulation, failing to provide a fair exchange, and asking for wisdom but failing to support it. As we discuss the need for clear ethics, we look at three constituencies that might be impacted: public participants, the general public, and the resource. Because convening agencies tend to have disproportionate power in a public participation process, we argue that convening agencies (and, through them, their consultants) ought to develop ethical standards addressing the three categories with respect to all three constituencies. Finally, based on our analysis, we suggest that sometimes less public participation is better. Environmental Practice 14: 212–219 (2012)
Public participation and environmental impact assessment
2013
What role can public participation play in environmental management? Among major tools for environmental management, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been widely practised in many countries. Its effectiveness, however, varies depending on the extent to which transparency and public participation are incorporated in its process. In this article, we analyse the role of public participation in environmental management by examining the operation of EIAs in two polities, Mainland China and Taiwan. In both cases, a lack of transparency and public participation had severely limited the effectiveness of EIA during the initial years when it was first introduced. Both polities have attempted to address the respective limitations of their EIA systems, and both have made some progress while encountering problems inherent in their underlying political institutions. The two cases illustrate the dynamic connections between political institutions and environmental management in developing countries.
Objectives of Public Participation in International Environmental Decision-Making
International and Comparative Law Quarterly
Public participation in international environmental decision-making can seek to fulfil different goals. This article explains how these goals can affect the design and appraisal of participatory processes and highlights the under-recognised value of law in determining the objectives of public participation in international environmental forums. A doctrinal analysis finds that substantive goals are most prominent in current international environmental law, but that a normative rationale for public participation could be gaining more formal endorsement through the growing legal recognition of linkages between procedural human rights and environmental protection.
2016
Public participation (PP) is an integral aspect of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. PP in EIA process facilitates environmental protection and sustainability of development projects. The study from which this paper is derived was conducted from 2008 to 2010. The paper focuses on a component of the study that used qualitative data to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of EIA legislation and policy in Botswana from 2005 to 2010. Documented data and key informants interviews were the principal methods used to gather the data used in the paper. The study established that there were useful mandatory provisions for public participation in the Botswana 2005 EIA A`ct (which was repealed in 2011). It was also established that the legal and policy framework in Botswana was consistent with international best practice principles of effective public participation drawn from the literature. The conclusion drawn is that the provisions for public participation in the EIA system bas...