ENVIRONET Stakeholder Engagement

Transcription

1 ENVIRONET Stakeholder Engagement Peter Booth Senior Technical Director 05/04/2011

2 Lecture Structure Impacting on others. Stakeholders and their interests. Why undertake stakeholder engagement. The importance of trust. What do we need to communicate. Planning a programme. SAFEGROUNDS. Can engagement go wrong? 2

3 How might the work you undertake impact on others? The decisions you make will usually have an impact on other people (these may be positive or negative) An environmental problem may be improved, or if it went wrong, made worse. You will be spending money (could it be used elsewhere?). You may require regulatory or governmental approval. A decision may lead to loss of jobs. 3

4 Looking for improvement 4

5 5 BEFORE

6 6 AFTER

7 What factors may drive your decisions? Available funding. Technical capability. Stakeholders views. Regulations. Availability of waste routes. Benefits to the region like employment, compensation and improved infrastructure. Environmental risk. Risk communication 7

8 How do we define stakeholders? A group or individual with an interest in or a role to play in a project, or a decision making process. Why may stakeholders be interested in what you do? 8 They may be potentially affected by a decision you will make. Decisions always result in a trade off of positive and negative issues. They may have a view on the outcome of a decision. They may be a representative of the wider community.

9 Stakeholder Categories Political and economic Government, customers, local community. Environmental Environmental regulators, local community, NGO s. Social Workforce, local suppliers, local community. Technical Nuclear regulator, R&D institutions, universities. 9

10 Issues of Interest Political and economic Overall costs, incentives and investments, impact on the local community. Environmental Transport, noise, dust, water usage, human health, environmental conservation. Social Health and safety, employment, impact on the local community. Technical Nuclear safety, education, work planning, radioprotection. 10

11 Stakeholders and their motivation Funding entities spend funds reasonably Regulators ensure legal requirements are met Neighbouring countries prevent impacts on them Local authorities ensure benefits for the local community Local communities accrue benefits while minimising derogatory impacts Elected officials - satisfy the public they represent General public health, sustainable development Universities plan and deliver education R&D organisations innovate and secure long term projects (funding) Tourist industry establish and promote attractions Media gather and disseminate information to sell papers 11

12 Evolution in Stakeholder Dialogue Decide Announce - Defend Use technical and political criteria to make a decision in secret. Stakeholder communication Essentially a one way process. Stakeholder engagement Two way process. Active participation Stakeholders may assist in the decision making process via attendance at workshops. 12

13 Why undertake stakeholder engagement? Develop approaches that can be made with community support. To improve transparency. To build trust. Make better decisions. Helps with risk communication. Can re-establish effective communication in instances where something has gone wrong and trust has been lost. 13

14 Why undertake stakeholder engagement? Do you remember or are you aware of these incidents? Chernobyl accident? Three Mile Island accident? Windscale accident? The Kursk submarine disaster? Fukushima NPP? Do you remember the last specific mining accident in your country? Do you remember the last major international air disaster? 14

15 Why undertake stakeholder engagement? In general people remember more clearly, and are more concerned about nuclear related accidents and incidents, than the equivalent from other industries. Why is this? Nuclear industry sometimes has a higher profile. Secrecy surrounding the nuclear industry. Lack of trust. An unwillingness to trust. People are scared. People often don t understand radiation and radioactivity. Risk perception (smoking vs radiation). With the Japan earthquake and tsunami Fukushima took most of the profile. 15

16 The Importance of Trust Stakeholder engagement is unlikely to be successful if trust has not been established. Trust is very difficult to regain once lost. Relationships need to be built up over time. Openness is vital, i.e. admitting mistakes, acknowledging uncertainty, providing the full picture. Reliability is important, you must undertake what you say you will, don t promise something and then not carry it out. 16

17 On what might we need to communicate? The nature of the problem. Different options and solutions to the problem. Impacts/benefits that the selected option might have on the community. Negative impacts. Positive impacts and benefits. Risks to human health and the environment. For work related to environmental management and remediation we usually undertake environmental risk assessments to determine the impact of a particular decision or option on human health and the environment. Risk communication. 17

18 Planning a Stakeholder Engagement Programme Key Stages Define the Purpose Plan the programme Review the plan Promote the programme Provide information Consult Participate Extend participation Compile input to decision Feedback Evaluate the programme 18

19 Mechanisms for engagement Involvement merely keeping people informed. Consultation two way process. Participation stakeholders take an active role in the decision making process. Newsletters. Project Information Centres. Opinion Surveys. Focus Groups. Public Meetings, Workshops and Open House policy. Community Liaison Groups. 19

20 Issues to consider Competing demands of the stakeholders. Access to information. Time. Funds. Awareness and understanding of the issues. Information. Public speaking. Access to the internet. 20

21 Saying and doing the right thing! Tony Hayward former CEO of BP. "We're sorry for the massive disruption it's caused to their lives," Hayward said. "There's no one who wants this thing over more than I do, I'd like my life back. I think the environmental impact of this disaster is likely to have been very, very modest. During the BP disaster he took part in a sailing regatta. Did this matter or not! The Right Honourable Gordon Brown (former UK Prime Minister). Sent a personal letter to the mother of a soldier killed in action. Letter got the family surname wrong and had other spelling errors. 21

22 The best intentions can sometimes go wrong! 22

23 An example of a successful stakeholder engagement process 23

24 UK s SAFEGROUNDS Learning Network Established twelve years ago. Covers contaminated land on UK nuclear and defence sites, so is not project specific. Aims; Produce, maintain and promote SAFEGROUNDS guidance. Provide a forum for debate and encourage stakeholder participation. Provide information on policy, regulatory and technical issues. Develop further SAFEGROUNDS supporting documents. 24

25 UK s SAFEGROUNDS Learning Network Steering Group made up of a diverse set of stakeholders. Site owners/operators, regulators, local councils and NGO s. Produced five key principles for the management of contaminated land. Now have over 200 members representing over 100 organisations. Hold workshops and conferences. 25

26 UK s SAFEGROUNDS Learning Network Five key principles were produced through consensus. Principle 1: Protection of People and the Environment Principle 2: Stakeholder Involvement Principle 3: Identifying the Preferred Land Management Option Principle 4: Immediate Action Principle 5: Record-Keeping Documents and best practice guidance are produced through consensus. Consensus would not have been achieved if relationships and trust had not been established in the first place. Where consensus is not established the documents will always state where the differences lie. NGO community is provided with funding to cover travel expenses. 26

27 UK s SAFEGROUNDS Learning Network Success story Led to a greater understanding of each others work and concerns. Diverse views have come together. Guidance used nationally and internationally. Site operators often expect contractors to provide evidence of working to the guidance and the SAFEGROUNDS principles. Proves that networks can be successful. 27

28 Can engagement go wrong? Yes Some groups may purposely obstruct the process. Can lead to longer project timescales and costs. Can sometimes lead to decisions that go against the problem holder. However; Important that the decision ultimately lies with the problem holder who is accountable for that decision. There will be many examples of where avoiding engagement has caused greater problems. 28

29 Summary There is no single approach communication with stakeholders is nation and culture specific. The level of stakeholder engagement should reflect the complexity of the problem in hand. Proper identification of stakeholders and their interests/concerns is the key to success. Effective dialogue needs time and money (it may lead to delays in your project). Listen to your stakeholders by establishing a two way process and gain trust. 29

30 Thank you for Listening - Any Questions? Staff Photo Here Peter Michael Booth Senior Technical Director T. +44 (0) E. peter.booth@wspgroup.com 30