The Co-Intelligence Institute has outlined on their website "The Principles of Public Participation". Some of the principles they include are that there is a promise to the public that their input will influence a decision. As well as the overall idea that public participation is solely based on the idea that the people who are affected by something, should have a say in what happens. Now, these are only two of the principles outlined by the Co-Intelligence Institute, but they are the most primal. I know that I want to be included in any decision that effects me, and I'm sure that that holds true for most people.
But I digress. Environmental policy is often confusing and wordy, and the government knows this, so the Environmental Protection Agency has taken it upon themselves to break down the public participation part of the 1990 Clean Air Act into plain english. The EPA breaks down the portions of 1990 Clean Air Act that tell the public how they can participate saying, that there are opportunities to write in to the EPA about a polluter in your area, or that a citizen can even review reports from polluters in the area. However, just telling people that they can do something, without telling them how seems pointless to me. Public Participation needs to be broken down into even simpler terms.
In an article from ChinaDialogue.net this very idea is discussed in regards to the pollution in China. The author writes that without public participation, the environmental movement in China would not exist, so it only makes sense that the public needs to take action again to create reform and try to fix the environmental degradation that is occurring at an alarming rate in the country. However, this is not just happening in China. It seems to me that as the world population grows, we are becoming more and more complacent about the rate at which we are using up our natural world. Yes, there are those extraordinary people like Richard Branson who are using their billions to try to save the world, but they cannot do it alone. Public participation is going to be the answer to saving our planet.
Environmental Impact Assessments have always been a hot issue because the way they are handled can either greatly limit or greatly utilize public participation. In Canada, there are changes being made to their environmental impact assessment protocol because of the intense need for resources. In order to expedite the process of getting to "the goods" public participation is being overall cut-out. This could lead to major problems in the future with regards to public health and safety, because corporations and the government don't always know the land as well as the communities that live and thrive off of it. In an article from Global News, this conflict is discussed, and explained from the government's point of view that they want to include the "legitimate" people and concerns but they don't want the big projects sidetracked in public participation by special interest groups.
Meanwhile in the European Union, Environmental Impact Assessments are more user friendly, says an article from eGovmonitor. The changes try to make the EIA's more transparent and accessible for the public. The following is a direct quote from the European Commision about the EIA Directive's relationship with public participation; its strong....
"The Directive ensures early public participation in the environmental decision-making
procedures. During the project assessment period, members of the public concerned
must be kept informed and have the ability to comment on developers' proposals, thus
enabling competent authorities and developers to make well-informed decisions."
The European Union appears to have a strong stance on the use of public participation in environmental action, and I think it is a position that more of us should live by. After all, if I pollute in my zip code today you may breathe in the affects of it tomorrow. We are all connected by our environment, so we all need a say in how we treat it.
Links in Order of Use:
Political Economy dictates that money/resources always wins.
ReplyDeleteGood discussion.
ReplyDelete