Mitsuo YOSHIDA, PhD Senior Advisor, Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) Professor (Visiting), Department of Environmental Science and

Transcription

1 Mitsuo YOSHIDA, PhD Senior Advisor, Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) Professor (Visiting), Department of Environmental Science and Technology, Tokyo Institute of Technology (TITECH) September 2010

2 Why do we discuss for Environmental Assessment? What is the concept of? How can we promote? Case histories in support for Environmental Assessment practice in Vietnam and other developing countries 2

3 Since its introduction in the United States in 1969, Environmental Assessment (EA), either Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in project level or Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) in policies, plans, and programs (PPPs) level, has developed into a widely accepted tool for decision-making of environmental-friendly development and sustainable development. Nowadays, most countries worldwide apply EIA as a preventive tool to evaluate the environmental impacts of projects, and are gradually introducing SEA for PPPs for development. However, the application and performance of EA differ significantly from one country to other. 3

4 Country EIA Regulation Cambodia EIA Decree 1999 China EIA Law 2002 Hong Kong (China) EIA Ordinance 1998 Indonesia EIA Law 2001 Japan EIA Law 1998 Korea EIA Act 1999 Lao PDR EIA Decree 2000 Mongolia EIA Law 1998 Philippines EIA Regulations 2003 Singapore EPCA 2000 Thailand NEQA 1992 Vietnam EIA Decree

5 EA performance can be defined as the performance of the formal EA system, i.e. the way in which it is described in relevant law and guideline. EA performance originally/normally indicates: the provision of information on anticipated environmental impacts, and proposed measures for the mitigation/prevention of possible environmental impacts. SEA for PPPs level, EIA for project level However, different (malfunctioning) EA Performance is observed particularly in developing countries. 5

6 Resources: Administrative management relating to the environment are weak and under-funded, and there are significant shortages of trained personnel. Political Commitment: The most important policy concern of Government is economic growth, even at the expense of short-term environmental degradation. Enforcement: Existing legislation for environmental planning tends to be adequate, but enforcement and the commitment to enforcement is not very functional. Poor Transparency: Development planning processes are generally influenced by politically powerful individuals. Scientific Information: Ecological and social data pertinent to EA are lacking or inaccurate, existing data are not shared widely, and data processing, storage, and retrieval capacities are limited. 6

7 Centralized Bureaucracy: Decision-making processes associated with mainstream development planning are usually highly centralized, often a bureaucratic structures. Poor Integration: This can lead to power struggles, turf protection, and resistance to integrated development planning. Economic and Technical: Most development planning bureaucrats are in economic or technical/scientific disciplines, which reinforces the tendency to view EA as a technical or scientific input, rather than a participatory process in planning. Disregard of Public Participation: Public participation in planning is commonly viewed as unnecessary, inefficient, time-consuming or even dangerous. 7

8 Under this contextual background, environmental planning initiatives occupy a marginalized position in the development planning processes, being assigned a load-mitigating role rather than strategic role in the planning process. This is probably because of the rational planning EA has been uncritically imported (or implemented under donor-driven initiative) into those countries without significant efforts to address cultural, political and administrative differences. Van Loon (2010) 8

9 for self-motivated and effective EA Four main reasons could be suggested to explain the different form and performance (cf. Partidario, 2005): (1) Different cultural interpretations of what development is about, what decision-making is about, and so on (2) Misunderstanding of the idea on environmental assessment (3) Inappropriate institutionalization of the EA system (4) Inadequate functionalization of the EA system These suggest the issue of (CD) needs for self-motivated, effective, and more rigorous implementations of EA (EIA/SEA). 9

10 How to Enhance Capacity How to enhance the insufficient capacity for EA? The concept of capacity building emerged from the context of international development cooperation (or development aid). Capacity building means mainly training activities where insufficient part of the capacity is supplied/built by external sources. It is possible to supply knowledge and technique, but impossible to do system and institution without standing actual conditions. Therefore, it first focused on building and strengthening of capacity, and in later years the development metaphor was adopted. What is the for EA? 10

11 Comprehensive: (CD) refers to the ongoing process of enhancing the problem-solving abilities of a country/society by taking into account all the factors at the individual, organizational, and societal levels. Endogenous: Defining capacity as the ability of a country to solve problems on their own and considering it as a complex of elements including institutions, policies, and social systems, the concept of CD attaches great importance to proactive and endogenous efforts (ownership) on the part of the country. 11 JICA(2006)

12 Issues in practice Institutional/Societal level (1) Organization without qualified individuals Organizational level (2) Qualified individuals but poor activity of organization Individual level (3) Qualified individuals and well organization, but poor acceptance in the society

13 Components of Capacity at Each Level Societal/Institutional Level Law, Bylaws, Guideline, Regulation Public Awareness, Private Sector Education, Social Capital Organizational Level Organization structure, Management, Fund Intellectual asset Physical asset, Equipment Human asset Individual Level Knowledge, skill Technique, Proficiency Intention, Responsibility Motivation Yoshida(2006)

14 An Example Cooperation among relevant organization Law and guideline for EA Public and Private sector participation Scientific, technical, and societal information Institutional and Societal Management and coordination of Environmental Administration Organizational Individual Knowledge and skill of Staff 14

15 Environmental Administration citizens Development Planning Org. NGO Development Implementation Org. Private Consulting Firm University Enabling environment Actual society is an ensemble of various individuals and organizations, the Stakeholders. 15

16 Institutional and Functional Aspects on for EA Institutional Aspect Institutionalization of the EA system based on the given conditions Functional Aspect Functionalization of the EA system with given resources and conditions 16

17 Institutions are structures and mechanisms of social order governing the behavior of individuals within a given human collectivity. Institutions are identified with the making and enforcing of rules governing cooperative human behavior (cf. Durkheim). The term "institutionalization" is the process of embedding something within an organization or society as a whole. The term "institutionalization" may also be used in a political sense to apply to the creation or organization of governmental institutions or particular bodies responsible for implementing policy. 17

18 Functionalization takes place during the process of the interaction among minds, ideas, and concepts, on one hand, and reality (resources and conditions), on the other (cf. Max Scheler). Functionalization of EA means that the ideas (institutions) of EA enter into a function with a given reality (resources and conditions), which is not a subject to a law. If EA is functionalized with the reality of a state of affairs, then EA works. If it is failed with the reality, it does not. 18

19 Capacity Strengthening at Institutional and Societal levels Capacity Strengthening at Organizational level Capacity Strengthening at Individual level Functionalization Institutionalization Provision/Setup Feedback Feedback in Environmental Assessment Vietnam Case History (1994 EIA Law) (EIA Institutionalization late90s to early 00s) (2008 SEA Pilot)

20 - IAIA(2002) A good-quality SEA process informs planners, decisionmakers, and public on the sustainability of strategic decisions, facilitates the search for the best alternative and ensures a democratic decision-making process. This enhances the credibility of decisions and leads to more cost- and time-effective EIA at the project level. For this purpose, a good-quality SEA process: is integrated, is sustainability-led, is focused, is accountable, is participative, and is interactive. The SEA performance criteria were developed 20 throughout three years of discussions in IAIA 20 annual conferences (1998 and 2000)

21 A good-quality SEA process is: The IAIA(2002) criteria aims to provide general guidance on how to build effective new SEA processes and evaluate the effectiveness of existing SEA processes. 6 Criteria Description (17 Sub-Criteria) Aspect of Capacity integrated - For all strategic decisions for the development - Interrelationships with social/economic aspects - tiered to policies in relevant sector and to projects Functional Institutional Institutional sustainabilityled - facilitates identification of sustainable option(s) and alternative proposals Functional focused - sufficient, reliable & usable information concentration on key issues of sustainability Customizing for the decision-making process Cost- and time-effective Technical Technical Functional Technical accountable - For strategic decision by leading agencies Professionalism, fairness, impartiality and balance Independent checks and verification Justification how sustainability issues accounted Functional Functional Institutional Institutional participative - Public involvement and information sharing - Their inputs and concerns in documentations - Easily-understood information and accessibility Institutional Institutional Technical interactive - Availability of the result early enough - Sufficient information on the actual impacts Functional 21 Institutional

22 Good-quality SEA process is integrated Ensures an appropriate environmental assessment of all strategic decisions relevant for the achievement of sustainable development. Addresses the interrelationships of biophysical, social and economic aspects. Is tiered to policies in relevant sectors and (transboundary) regions and, where appropriate, to project EIA and decision making. IAIA(2002) 22

23 Good-quality SEA process is sustainability-led Facilitates identification of development options and alternative proposals that are more sustainable, that contributes to the overall sustainable development strategy as laid down in Rio 1992 and defined in the specific policies or values of a country. IAIA(2002) 23

24 Good-quality SEA process is focused. Provides sufficient, reliable and usable information for development planning and decision making. Concentrates on key issues of sustainable development. Is customized to the characteristics of the decision making process. Is cost- and time-effective. IAIA(2002) 24

25 Good-quality SEA process is accountable. Is the responsibility of the leading agencies for the strategic decision to be taken. Is carried out with professionalism, rigor, fairness, impartiality, and balance. Is subject to independent checks and verification. Documents and justifies how sustainability issues were taken into account in decision making. IAIA(2002) 25

26 Good-quality SEA process is participative. Informs and involves interested and affected public and government bodies throughout the decision-making process. Explicitly addresses their inputs and concerns in documentation and decision-making. Has clear, easily-understood information requirements and ensures sufficient access to all relevant information. IAIA(2002) 26

27 Good-quality SEA process is interactive. Ensures availability of the assessment results early enough to influence the decision-making process and inspire future planning. Provides sufficient information on the actual impacts of implementing a strategic decision, to judge whether this decision should be amended and to provide a basis for future decisions. IAIA(2002) 27

28 Capacities for EA at Levels Stakeholders Environmental Administration PPPs and Project Implementation Public Individual Level Staff sufficiency (quality, skills, personal effectiveness) Communication Staff sufficiency (quality, skills, personal effectiveness) Communication Knowledge actors (quality, skills, personal effectiveness) Communication Organizational Level Resource capacity (financial, office) Decision-making Management Resource capacity (financial, office) EA execution tech. Report preparation Organized civil society Resource capacity (financial) Institutional Level Legal provisions EA EA procedure Networking Mission and Strategy Structure Institutional capacity Transparency of information Obedience to formal decision Reviewing Monitoring Networking Participating Societal Level Regulatory quality Accountability to public Accountability to public Organized civil society Mass media General Scientific and technological information, Law and regulation, Culture Inter-organization cooperation, Political and economic background

29 Needed Capacity Components for Institutionalization and Functionalization Ability for participatory engagement and empowerment to all the stakeholders, including marginalized group(s). Ability for analysis particularly to address environmental trends and the economic impacts with different options, including futuresearching. Ability for planning and prioritization, including management skills. Ability for political action and communications for performing clear, well-targeted and influential SEA. Ability for monitoring, evaluation and learning for handling complex phenomena such as environment-development links. Specific scientific/technical capabilities on given issues (Sen). Modified from Dalal-Clayton and Bass(2004) 29

30 Framework of the for Environmental Assessment Desirable Outcomes For establishing EA Provision of EA and Central/Local decisions for setup Institutionalization of the EA system Capacity at three levels for each stakeholder Individual level Organizational level Obtaining, strengthening, connecting, mastering, adapting, maintaining the capacities for: Participatory engagement Analysis, future searching, visioning Planning and prioritization Politics and communication Functionalization of the EA system Resources Institutional/ Societal level Monitoring and learning Specific scientific/technical capabilities 30 Modified from Dalal-Clayton and Bass (2009) and Bass et al. (2006)

31 Environmental Assessment <PPPs> Strategic Environmental Policy Level Assessment (SEA) Direction and Framework 1) Done by policy maker of each Program 2) Public involvement, Plan/Program Level Environmental authority Package of Projects, or 3) Assessment in Outline of Project policy/planning level Enhanced Capacities for Environmental Assessment Development Activity Flow CD Project Level Detailed action plan for Project implementation Assessment (EIA) 1) Done by developer 2) Public involvement, Capacities for Environmental Assessment Environmental Impact Environmental authority Project Implementation 31

32 Expansion of Inclusiveness in Capacity Projects under a PPP SEA Functionalization Planning for Sustainable development Project EIA Project activities with environmental consideration Capacity Development CD) of Entire Society Project Project activities without environmental consideration Institutionalization 32

33 (1) Provision/Setup of an EA system, such as law, guideline and procedure, is the first step for introducing EA. (2) However, we cannot expect proper performance of EA process without institutionalization and functionalization of the EA system. (3) The institutionalization and functionalization strongly depend on comprehensive of stakeholders at individual, organizational, and societal levels. (4) Development of the scope from EIA in project to SEA in PPPs (policies/plans/programs) can be achieved by CD along with expanding the inclusiveness of Capacity. Extened version of this presentation can be freely downloaded from the following web site: 33

34 Van Loon, L.(2010) An analytical framework for capacity development in EIA The case of Yemen. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30, Dalal-Clayton, B. and Bass, S. (2009) The Challenges of Environmental Mainstreaming - Experience of integrating environment into development institutions and decisions. IIED ICEM(2008) Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Quang Nam Province Hydropower Plan for the Vu Gia-Thu Bon River Basin. ADB Technical Assistance Consultant s Report prepared for the ADB, MONRE, MOITT & EVN, Hanoi, Viet Nam. 原科幸彦(2007編) 環境計画 政策研究の展開: 持続可能な社会づくりへの合意形成 岩波書店 Yoshida, M. (2006) Dissecting technical cooperation in solid waste management from a capacity development perspective. Technology and Development, 19, Maria do Rosário Partidário (2005) Capacity-Building and SEA. In Implementing Strategic Environmental Assessment (edited by Michael Schmidt, Elsa João and Eike Albrecht), p Springer-Verlag Doberstein, B. (2003) Environmental capacity-building in a transitional economy: the emergence of EIA capacity in Viet Nam. Impact Assessment Project Appraisal, 21,(1), IAIA (2002) Strategic Environmental Assessment Performance Criteria. IAIA Special Publication Series No.1 (January 2002). Abaza, H., Bisset, R. and Sadler, B. (2004) Environmental impact assessment and strategic environmental assessment towards an integrated approach. UNEP. 34

35 Capacity Assessment References (JICA Reports on ) キャパシティ アセスメント ハンドブック 2008 指標から国を見る 2008 事業マネジメント ハンドブック 2007 開発途上国廃棄物分野のキャパシティ ディベロップメント支援のために 2005 キャパシティ ディベロップメント CDとは何か JICAでCDをどう捉え JICA事業の改善にどう活かす か 途上国の主体性に基づく総合的課題対処能力の向上を目指して