21st of April, 2005

1
Public Participation in Environmental Impact
Assessment

• 21st of April, 2005
• Varna, Bulgaria

2
introduction

• the questionnaire Public Participation and
  Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in a
  transboundary context - Romania and Bulgaria was
  designed by the project team to assess the level
  of knowledge and awareness of NGOs and local
  authorities regarding the current implementation
  of the Espoo Convention in Romania and Bulgaria
• the same questionnaire was designed for, and used
  in both countries
• it was implemented in Romania during 2004, and
  spring of 2005
• information envisaged by the questionnaire
• - practical fields of application of EIA
  procedure
• - the way in which EIA is implemented in a
  transboundary context
• - the way in which public participation is
  actually used
• - public participation - EIA of local projects,
  and policy proposals

3
affiliation

• the questionnaire was filled in by 33
  respondents, out of 330
• almost two thirds are NGO representatives
• the rest are mainly representatives of local
  public authorities or environmental ones

4
type of community

• The answers came mostly from inhabitants of urban
  communities. Three quarters are from cities with
  more than 100.000 inhabitants
• The location/county distribution is the following
  Bucharest (8) Brasov Buzias/Timis
  Constanta/Constanta Craiova Drobeta Turnu
  Severin/Mehedinti (3) Galati Giurgiu/Giurgiu
  Pitesti/Arges Râmnicu Vâlcea/Vâlcea
  Sibiu/Sibiu Sighisoara/Mures Teleorman No
  answer (11)

5
age gender

• More than half of the respondents are in the
  25-45 years category (see Age).
• The gender is relatively equally distributed,
  with a small superiority of women over men (see
  Gender).

6
EIA - what is it

• Almost 90 percent of the respondents know what is
  the meaning of the wording Environmental Impact
  Assessment (see Question 1. Do you know what
  Environmental Impact Assessment is?)

7
major goals of EIA procedure

• the respondents believe that the main goal of the
  EIA procedure is environmental protection,
  including biodiversity
• integrating principles of sustainable
  development, public participation including
  environmental concerns into project activities
  are also well represented in the amount of
  answers

8
Espoo Convention

• over three quarters of the respondents believe
  they know what is representing the Espoo
  Convention (see Question 3. Do you know what
  UNECE Convention on Environmental Impact
  Assessment in a transboundary context is?

9
public participation

• PP was introduced by Question 6. Is public
  participation essential during an EIA procedure?
• at the question if public participation is really
  necessary during EIA, the main answer was that
  it is required by law
• other answers are also well represented

10
who can legally participate?

• almost 90 percent of the respondents agreed that
  both the public of the Affected Party and the one
  of the Party of Origin have the right to
  participate to an EIA in a transboundary context

11
who is in fact participating

• most of the respondents have never taken part to
  an EIA
• those who have taken part to such a procedure
  were representing in most cases an organization -
  either NGO or local authority
• only one third of the EIA procedures previously
  mentioned by the respondents were organized in a
  transboundary context

12
groups which are participating

• at the question which groups can participate to
  an EIA in a transboundary context, the first on
  the list are the representatives of the Competent
  Authorities, both from the Party of Origin and
  the Affected Party (see Question 11. Which
  representatives of the following groups can
  participate at an EIA in a transboundary
  context?).
• notes at others, there was a mention of the
  owner of the project/investor there are also
  some I dont know answers.

13
public hearings

• almost half of the respondents say bluntly I
  dont know when asked about the proportion of
  EIA unattended public hearings (see Question 12.
  What is the relative share of the EIA public
  hearings, which are not attended by any public?).
  The rest is split among all the possible
  categories of answers.

14
return to sender

• the major reason why the EIA reports are returned
  to their authors is omissions and incompleteness
  in the submitted information, but others are
  also mentioned (see Question 13. Which reason
  would you name as the most frequent one for
  returning EIA reports back to the authors for
  amending?).
• as an extra reason, not knowing the legislation
  has been added.

15
case studies

• two thirds of the respondents said they are aware
  about EIA procedures in a transboundary context,
  and they named the following projects
• NPP Belene Bulgaria (8), Rosia Montana (4), the
  Bulgarian nuclear industry (2), NPP Cernavoda U2
  (2), Bystroe (2), the general urban plan of
  Svinita Mehedinti (2), Kozlodui, the bridge over
  the Danube at Calafat-Vidin, DEF, Giurgiu-Ruse,
  Save Vama Veche, Calarasi float glass factory,
  Baia Mare.

16
capacity building

• main answer is participation in training
  sessions on tools of public participation in the
  EIA procedure
• the majority of the answers are grouped in the
  training category
• an additional type of training mentioned is
  access to information

17
main information sources

• the main source of information is the Internet,
  followed by workshops and seminars, and by
  written media
• at others, the following comments were made
  EPA SGA, the Official Monitor documents
  emitted by other public institutions
• which is the most affordable source of
  information? - Internet, written press, radio,
  TV, workshops, seminars, are given preference

18
comments on communication

• The process of consulting the stakeholders is
  mainly a communication process. Unfortunately, I
  know enough cases in which techniques are applied
  for communicating without a purpose - without a
  receptor for the message. The consultation is
  purely formal. Another aspect concerns the actual
  organization of the consultation actions
  professionalism is needed, which is lacking in
  many cases when we speak about public
  authorities.
• It is an interesting domain, but at level of the
  general public, the information is limited.
  Before meeting your organization, I had no idea
  about this subject.

19
final conclusions

• A first observation is that the number of those
  interested in the subject seems rather small.
  Sent to 330 NGO and local authorities
  representatives, the questionnaire had a return
  rate of around 10 percent.
• The interest for the subject seems also to be
  confined, at least for the moment, only to the
  persons living in big cities, and especially in
  Bucharest. The most active category is
  represented by persons between 25-45 years old.
• The majority of the respondents know what an
  Environmental Impact Assessment is. However, they
  do not know very well its goal.
• The majority of the respondents know what the
  UNECE Convention on EIA in a transboundary
  context is, but they have different degrees of
  knowledge on this issue.
• It must be mentioned that public participation to
  an Environmental Impact Assessment in a
  transboundary context is seen primarily as being
  requested by law, and only secondarily as a
  way of improving the project and the process.
• The knowledge of the respondents related to the
  Environmental Impact Assessment procedure is
  mainly theoretical, because most of them have
  never participated to such an activity. The
  number of those who have participated to an
  Environmental Impact Assessment procedure in a
  transboundary context is even smaller.

20
final conclusions (ii)

• The respondents know about projects subject to an
  Environmental Impact Assessment in a
  transboundary context, the most frequent cases
  being those regarding the Bulgarian nuclear
  industry. There are also mentions of projects
  that are probably not subject to an Environmental
  Impact Assessment procedure in a transboundary
  context.
• Main areas mentioned are energy industry, mining
  industry and transport industry. There is no
  mention on activities from the agricultural,
  forestry, fishery a/o fields.
• Regarding the ways to strengthen the capacity of
  the organizations to participate to Environmental
  Impact Assessment, most of the respondents first
  mention the participation in training sessions,
  followed by an increased staff.
• The main source of information of the respondents
  is the Internet, followed by workshops and
  seminars, and by articles in the press.
• The only two final general comments are
  symptomatic. The first observes with lucidity but
  also with sadness that public participation
  procedures seem more to be simulated by the
  authorities, than implemented with full
  responsibility. The second is even more dramatic,
  showing the fact that there is a public who
  completely lacks information on Environmental
  Impact Assessment in a transboundary context.