Evaluation of the Extent, Methods and Levels of Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessment Reports
Authors
1
M.S. Environmental Education, Graduate Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Environmental Planning, Management and Education, Graduate Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
3
Professor, Department of Environmental Planning, Management and Education, Graduate Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Public participation is recognized as one of the fundamental principles of environmental impact assessment (EIA) and as an integral part of EIA reports without which such reports lose further consideration merit. The aim of the present study was to investigate the methods and levels of public participation in EIA reports in Iran and to compare it with a sample from four countries including South Africa and Pakistan (developing countries), and Australia and the United States (developed countries), five reports from each country. For this purpose, from 130 environmental impact assessment reports in Department of Environment of Tehran Province, 98 reports were randomly selected using Cochran's formula and analyzed through checklists.
Findings show that lack of attention to the public participation in EIA procedure in Iran has led to a significant weakness in the quantity, methods and levels of public participation in EIA reports. In this respect only 7.1 percent of the reports in Iran showed limited public participation, while in the four other countries, sufficient attention to the importance of public participation were detected leading to public participation in 95% of the reports. One of the most commonly used methods of attracting public participation in these reports has been holding of public meetings that can, in addition to disseminating information and receiving feedback, raise levels of public participation and empower the participators.
Findings show that lack of attention to the public participation in EIA procedure in Iran has led to a significant weakness in the quantity, methods and levels of public participation in EIA reports. In this respect only 7.1 percent of the reports in Iran showed limited public participation, while in the four other countries, sufficient attention to the importance of public participation were detected leading to public participation in 95% of the reports. One of the most commonly used methods of attracting public participation in these reports has been holding of public meetings that can, in addition to disseminating information and receiving feedback, raise levels of public participation and empower the participators.
Keywords
باقری، ا. 1381. مبانی و مفاهیم ارزشیابی طرح های عمرانی، دفتر نظارت و ارزشیابی.
خدابنده دیزج تکیه، ه.، ترجمه فردوسی، سعید، قدوسی، ف. 1387. ارزیابی اثرات محیطزیستی تجارب، تنگناها و روند آینده، نشریه علمی محیط و توسعه، سال دوم، شماره سوم.
دبیری، ف. و کیانی، م. 1386. بررسی قوانین و مقررات پیشگیرانه از جمله ارزیابی اثرات زیستمحیطی در کشور ایران و چند کشور صنعتی، علوم و تکنولوژی محیط زیست، دوره نهم، شماره 4: 95-101.
رحمتی، ع. و خدابنده دیزج تکیه، ه. 1393. آسیب شناسی فرایند ارزیابی محیطزیستی در ایران، ویژهنامه پژوهشهای محیطزیست، سال 1: 91-98.
شرفی، م. و برک پور، ن. 1389. گونه شناسی تکنیک های مشارکت شهروندان در برنامهریزی شهری، برمبنای سطوح مختلف مشارکت، دوفصلنامه دانشگاه هنر، شماره 4 :77- 101.
میرزایی، ف. و مبرقعی دینان، ن. 1391. تلفیق ارزش گذاری اقتصادی و ارزیابی اثرات محیط زیستی در ایران: چالش ها و راهکارها، نشریه علمی محیط و توسعه، سال سوم، شماره پنجم.
میرموسوی، ع. 1375. مبانی دینی و فرهنگ سیاسی مشارکتی، نقد و نظر، سال دوم، شماره 4 و 3.
ویسی، ه. و لیاقتی، ه. 1387. جایگاه مشارکت مردمی در فرایند ارزیابی اثرات محیطزیستی، نشریه علمی محیط و توسعه، سال اول، شماره دوم.
Arnstein, Sh. 1969. Ladder of Citizen Participation, AIP Journal, 216-224.
Creighton, J. 2005. The Public Participation Handbook: Making better Decisions through Citizen Involvement, John Wiley & Sone, San Francisco.
Daniele Brombal, A.; Moriggi, A. & Marcomini. 2017. Evaluating public participation in Chinese EIA. An integrated Public Participation Index and its application to the case of the New Beijing Airport. Environmental Impact Assessment Review; 62: 49–60.
Deshler, D. & Sock, D. 1985. Community Development Participation, A Concept Review of the International Literature, Paper presented at the International league for social commitment in Adult Education, Ljungskile, Sweden.
Geoffrey, H. & Salomons, George Hoberg. 2014. setting boundaries of participation in environmental impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review; 45: 69–75.
Hampton, W. 1977. Research into Public Participation in Structure Planning, Public Participation in Planning, Edited by Derrick Sewell & Coppock, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, PP. 27 – 42.
http://iap2.org/practitionertools/index.shtml (accessed in 2008.02.18).
Jitendra, K. & Panigrahi, Susruta Amirapu. 2012. An assessment of EIA system in India, Environmental Impact Assessment Review 34, 1–11.
Lis Dhundale. 2013. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION COMPLIANCE, the Danish Institute for Human Rights
Pacione, Michael. 1988, Public Participation in Neighbourhood Change, Applied Geography, Vol. 8, 229-247.
Priscoli, J. 2003. Participation Consensus Building and Conflict Management Training, UNESC.
Sanoff, H. 2000. Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning, John Wiley & Sons, INC.
Smith, B. 2003. Public Policy and Public Participation Engaging Citizens and Community in the Development of Public Policy, BLSmith Groupwork Inc.
Tvevad, A.; Farr, J. A.; Jendroska, J. & Szwed, D. 2001. Handbook on Public. Participation in Envoironmental Impact Assesment Procedure in Poland, Minstiry of Environment, UI. Wawelska 52/ 54, pp: 900-922.
World Bank. 1996. World Bank Participation Sourcebook. Environment Department.
